The first amendment calls for undeniable freedom of speech and of the press.
But what happens if social media platforms start blocking content from being shared? Is it a violation of the constitution? Is it fair? Is it just?
Whatever it is, it’s happening now.
After the New York Post released a bombshell exposé Wednesday alleging that Hunter Biden and his presidential nominee father, Joe Biden, met with a top executive of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma – during Biden’s vice presidency – both Facebook and Twitter censored – and blocked – sharing of the article on their respective platforms.
And now they’re trying to clean up the mess.
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey released a statement in a tweet Wednesday night saying it was “unacceptable” to block users from sharing the Post’s report without providing a clear message as to why.
The statement came hours after several high-profile Republicans, including Sen. Josh Hawley, blasted the social media giant for the censorship, according to the Post.
“Our communication around our actions on the @nypost article was not great. And blocking URL sharing via tweet or DM with zero context as to why we’re blocking: unacceptable,” Dorsey wrote in the tweet.
— jack (@jack) October 14, 2020
Dorsey’s tweet linked to an official statement from the network:
“We want to provide much-needed clarity around the actions we’ve taken with respect to two NY Post articles that were first Tweeted this morning,” Twitter representatives wrote. “The images contained in the articles include personal and private information — like email addresses and phone numbers — which violate our rules. As noted this morning, we also currently view materials included in the articles as violations of our Hacked Materials Policy.
”Commentary on or discussion about hacked materials, such as articles that cover them but do not include or link to the materials themselves, aren’t a violation of this policy,” they continued. “Our policy only covers links to or images of hacked material themselves. The policy, established in 2018, prohibits the use of our service to distribute content obtained without authorization. We don’t want to incentivize hacking by allowing Twitter to be used as the distribution for possibly illegally obtained materials.”
Facebook also said it would limit the spread of the article, pending a review by independent fact-checkers.
Taking it a step further, Twitter also locked the Post’s main Twitter account, as well as White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany’s personal account after she shared the article to her followers, the Daily Caller reports.
This active censorship of the media has people wondering: are these platforms really trying to protect the election like they claim, or are they just protecting Joe Biden’s campaign?
There is something very important to note.
In September, Twitter’s director of public policy Carlos Monje left the social media company’s D.C. office to join Joe Biden’s transition team after helping to host a fundraiser for the democratic nominee.
Red flag alert.
According to a LinkedIn profile cited in a Politico article, Monje started working at Twitter in 2017. Prior to that, he served in the White House during the Obama administration, and on the transition team for Hillary Clinton
It seems like, despite the platform’s goal of “impartiality,” Twitter does, in fact, have political leanings.
But, the suspicious activity doesn’t stop there.
Biden’s transition team also named former Facebook executive and senior regulatory official Jessica Hertz as its general counsel and ethics arbiter in September, according to Politico.
So, let’s get this straight.
Biden’s campaign team is chocked full of former directors and executives of the very social media companies that are censoring the Post’s exposé?
And those same social media platforms claim to be unbiased?
With the election just 19 days away, the suspicion is quickly unraveling.
Is Joe Biden behind the whole operation?