Big Tech Wielding a Double-Edged Sword

 

    

    There has been much tumult since the January 6^th Capitol Hill riot involving extreme Trump supporters storming the United States Capitol building in attempt to prevent the House of Representative and Senate from counting the electoral votes cast in the most recent presidential election. Backlash has been quick and harsh against the rioters and President Trump’s irresponsible rhetoric, which many argue helped incite the violence. President Trump was banned from Facebook and Twitter as these social media companies vowed to more closely monitor and scrutinize activity from potentially radicalized right wing individuals and organizations. The ire of the news media and tech companies then quickly turned to the social media app Parler. Parler is accused of allowing hate speech and extremist content to go unregulated as well as providing a platform on which the Capitol Hill protest were organized. Given these allegations Google and Apple removed the app from their stores and Amazon decided to pull its web services from Parler which effectively disabled the ability to use the app for the time being. Conservatives and more left leaning organizations alike have been voicing concern over these actions as only an opportunistic and dangerous crackdown against conservative speech and representation on Twitter and Facebook as well as on alternative platforms.

However, big techs justification for the crackdown on Parler seems to already be turning into a double-edged sword. Evidence has emerged that Facebook, Facebook run Instagram, and Twitter were widely used to organize and promote the January 6^th Capitol Hill protest as well as spread false information about the presidential election. By big tech’s own standard, should not these platforms also face harsh punishment like the removal of their web services and their apps from Apple and Google’s app stores? If the standard that any platform credibly accused of hosting content which may be considered extreme or radical in nature should face retribution and destruction, then this standard should also be upheld for bigger platforms as well. Despite the logical progression of this standard, this will never be upheld in realty. Big tech is quick to squelch those that present a threat to their control over the social media and news sphere, but when they turn out to also be guilty of the same actions as those which they target for destruction, suddenly it is a time for careful reflection and deference for big tech companies like Facebook and Twitter. This type of double standard will only add fuel to an already raging fire which is American public discourse. It is almost as though the biased and arbitrary picking and choosing of which individuals and groups are allowed to have a voice in the public square is leaving some feeling disillusioned and angry about what is perceived as a coordinated crackdown on certain viewpoints. The full ramifications of big tech’s actions remain to be seen. Time will tell what effects these actions have on the public discourse, political division, and freedom of speech and expression in the United States.

Follow my Twitter for weekly updates and alerts for new blog post.