FreeSpeech and Censorship: Thread

[grarpamp]

Govts: Free Speech is "Grossly Offensive" to Governments...


Keep Calm & Censor On: Musk Summoned To UK Parliament To Answer For
His Pledge To Restore Free Speech

https://jonathanturley.org/2022/05/05/stay-calm-and-censor-on-musk-summoned-to-parliament-to-answer-for-his-pledge-to-restore-free-speech/
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/378/digital-culture-media-and-sport-committee/news/166198/elon-musk-invited-to-give-evidence-to-dcms-committee/
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-02/0285/210285.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/world-first-online-safety-laws-introduced-in-parliament
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/27/section/1

I previously wrote about Hillary Clinton’s call on European countries
to pass censorship laws to force social media companies like Twitter
to regulate speech even after Elon Musk’s pledge to restore free
speech to Twitter. Now the British Parliament has called on Musk to
testify and to explain his alarming pledge to restore free speech.

The Biden Administration’s Disinformation Governance Board head, Nina
Jankowisz, previously called upon Great Britain to impose state
censorship rules. That call has grown since Musk’s purchase. Until
now, a unified front of corporate censors was able to maintain an
extensive system of censorship with the encouragement of politicians
and pundits, including Joe Biden and Democratic members .

The head of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee in the
House of Commons, Conservative MP Julian Knight has assured her
countrymen that they can stay calm and censor on. She issued a letter
for Musk to appear before the committee to answer for his terrifying
suggestion of free speech:

    “At a time when social media companies face the prospect of
tighter regulations around the world, we’re keen to learn more about
how Mr Musk will balance his clear commitment to free speech with new
obligations to protect Twitter’s users from online harms.”

Like the EU’s censorship plans under the Digital Services Act, the
proposed Online Safety Bill would introduce state censorship through
the purview of Ofcom (The Office of Communications), the broadcasting
regulator in Britain. It would allow the company to fine firms up to
ten percent of their global revenue should they violate ill-defined
“harm” standards.

If passed, Clinton and others hope that the Europeans can replace
corporate censorship with good old-fashioned state censorship. This
includes confiscatory fines for anything deemed “grossly offensive.“
The bill would allow countries like Great Britain to impose censorship
on the rest of the world.

The decline of free speech in the United Kingdom has long been a
concern for free speech advocates  (here and here and here and here
and here and here and here and here). Once you start as a government
to criminalize speech, you end up on a slippery slope of censorship.
What constitutes hate speech or “malicious communications” remains a
highly subjective matter and we have seen a steady expansion of
prohibited terms and words and gestures. Even having “toxic
ideologies” is now a crime.

Great Britain would now make censorship one of its greatest exports.
To do so, they first have to stomp out advocates for free speech like
Musk by threatening to bankrupt his company if it tries to restore
free speech to the Internet.