What State Action Doctrine? Biden Administration Renews Push For Deal With TikTok, Where US Government Would Oversee Content Moderation On TikTok

What State Action Doctrine? Biden Administration Renews Push For Deal With TikTok, Where US Government Would Oversee Content Moderation On TikTok

For all the (mostly misleading) talk of the US government having too much say in content moderation decisions, this move would literally put US government officials effectively in control of content moderation decisions for TikTok. Apparently the thinking is “welp, it’s better than the Chinese government.” But… that doesn’t mean it’s good. Or constitutional.

Honestly, what this reads as is the moral panic over China and TikTok so eating the brains of US officials that rather than saying “hey, we should have privacy laws that block this,” they thought instead “hey, that would be cool if we could just do all the things we accuse China of doing, but where we pull the strings.”

So, look, if we’re going to talk about US government influence over content moderation choices, why aren’t we talking much more about this?

Related:

TikTok and U.S. rekindle negotiations, boosting app’s hopes for survival

CFIUS monitoring agencies, including the departments of Justice, Treasury and Defense, would have the right to access TikTok facilities at any time and overrule its policies or contracting decisions. CFIUS would also set the rules for all new company hires, including that they must be U.S. citizens, must consent to additional background checks and could be denied the job at any time.

A Draft Of TikTok’s Plan To Avoid A Ban Gives The U.S. Government Unprecedented Oversight Power

U.S. Government Seeks Extensive Oversight over TikTok

It’s Wrong For Politicians To Announce Plans To Punish Companies For Speech, No Matter Who Does It

I feel like I keep needing to write this, but once again, no matter who does it and no matter which company they’re targeting, it’s wrong for politicians to promise to punish companies for their speech. For some reason, many people’s position on this point changes based on whether or not they like or dislike the politician, and whether or not they like or dislike the company. But it’s wrong.

It’s wrong when Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee go after Major League Baseball for its speech. It’s wrong when Senator Elizabeth Warren threatens Amazon for its speech. It’s wrong when Senator Marsha Blackburn (and a ton of others) threaten Disney for its speech. It’s wrong when White House officials threaten Facebook for its speech. And it’s wrong when Rep. Ken Buck threatens Apple for its speech.

All of this is grandstanding nonsense, but it’s designed to suppress speech. It’s designed to punish companies for speech that these elected officials dislike. And that’s even if the companies have said something stupid or acted in a way that deserves a regulatory response. By positioning any response as retaliation for speech, these politicians are fundamentally going against the 1st Amendment.

It’s Wrong For Politicians To Announce Plans To Punish Companies For Speech, No Matter Who Does It