Twitter vs. Facebook vs. the President. Over the past few weeks, social media has been embroiled in an even greater political maelstrom than usual. Twitter responded to falsities and hate speech by President Trump with fact checks and warnings. Hundreds of Facebook employees staged a virtual walk-out over the company’s failure to do the same. Trump channeled his ire into a long-threatened executive order targeting social media’s perceived liberal bias and threatening to claw back parts of Section 230, which protects these companies from being held liable for their content moderation.
These are high-profile versions of the content decisions that social media companies make on a daily, hourly, minute-to-minute basis. What speech should be permitted, flagged, or taken down? Should these companies be held to account for their decisions? Is Facebook's new Oversight Board the answer? Join us for a discussion on the role of these powerful gatekeepers in regulating political speech in our democracy.
David Kaye, @davidakaye
Clinical Professor of Law and Director of the International Justice Clinic at the University of California, Irvine School of Law
UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression
Kate Klonick, @Klonick
Assistant Professor at Law at St. John's University Law School
Affiliate Fellow at the Information Society Project at Yale Law School
Jennifer Daskal, @jendaskal
Professor and Faculty Director, Tech, Law, & Security Program at American University Washington College of Law
Join the conversation online using #FreeSpeechProject and following @FutureTenseNow.
The Free Speech Project is in partnership with the Tech, Law & Security Program at American University Washington College of Law: