“You can run but you can’t hide…Our teams will be ready for enforcement”
This tweet may appear to threaten Elon Musk and Twitter, but in actuality - it’s threatening you and me. Since Elon’s purchase of the platform, he has repeated that his mission is to make Twitter a better and more transparent platform to serve as our modern-day town square. Elon withdrew from the EU Voluntary Code of Practice against disinformation this week, putting his words into action.
Following the withdrawal, Thierry Breton, the EU’s Internal Market Commissioner tweeted: “Twitter leaves EU Voluntary Code of Practice against disinformation. But obligations remain. You can run but you can’t hide. Beyond voluntary commitments, fighting disinformation will be legal obligation under #DSA as of August 25. Our teams will be ready for enforcement”.
Thierry’s response not only threatens the social media giant, but free speech at large.
As a society, we have become increasingly desensitized to language surrounding mis-/disinformation along with the implications that come from combating it. "Fight against disinformation" is a phrase we often hear and think is a good idea - ensuring that only valid information is spread. However, the question becomes, who gets to decide what information is valid? Who gets to be the arbiter of truth? Big Tech? Legacy Media? Government? Partisan Players?
Unfortunately, we have already begun to see what happens when we give these players the authority to decide what truth is. Most notably we have seen this through the COVID-19 pandemic, and the 2020 election. Free speech, the ability to ask questions, and the right to engage in debate are lost when we grant human institutions the power to determine what is true. Just take a look below.
COVID-19 Pandemic:
Any information that did not come from Dr. Fauci, the CDC, or the White House was labeled disinformation…some of which has now been proven true.
Instead of Questions leading to rightful investigations they were shut down and ignored.
Individuals who shared information that strayed from the given narrative were censored, fact-checked, and sometimes even had their accounts’ reach limited.
2020 Campaigning and Election:
Big Tech and FBI correspondent’s removal of the Hunter Biden Laptop Story from social media platforms before the 2020 presidential election.
Those who had questions or posed reasonable doubt were labeled far-right election deniers, conspiracy theorists, and threats to democracy.
Individuals who shared information that strayed from the given narrative were censored, fact-checked with “Fraud in US Elections is rare” or the infamous “The 2020 Election was the most secure election in history”, and sometimes even had their account’s reach limited.
We have been taught to fear disinformation, but what if our concern should lie more with those who label truth as disinformation? We open the door for manipulation and control when we allow one central conglomerate to decide what truth is and who gets to speak. We need to be a citizenry that can discern for themselves what is and is not true. Therefore, when it comes to the question of who gets to be the arbiter of truth, instead of Big Tech, Government Officials, Legacy Media, or Partisan Players having that authority - what if we gave it back to the people?
America’s Foundation
Since America’s founding, free speech has been the bedrock of a functioning democracy. James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, felt that freedom of speech was a vital element for self-governance. He understood that a government built by the people and for the people can only stand if its people have the freedom to communicate without fear of reprisal.
“Our First Amendment freedoms give us the right to think what we like and say what we please. And if we the people are to govern ourselves, we must have these rights, even if they are misused by a minority.” - James Madison
What we are seeing today is not the first time powerful individuals have tried to “fight disinformation”. Although the language has become more vague, the intent remains the same. It is ironic that not long after the first amendment was put into place, the Sedition Act of 1798 made it a crime for citizens to “print, utter, or publish…any false, scandalous, and malicious writing” about the United States government. The act was used as a means to suppress and prosecute political opponents. Sound familiar?
James Madison and Thomas Jefferson fought against this act before it was ultimately overruled and deemed unconstitutional. Thomas Jefferson stated during his first inaugural address:
“If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.”
His intention was to convey the essence of dissent, even against one’s own nation, and its link to the fundamental right of free speech, a right that is not available universally. Moreover, he is showing the trust he has in the future of America to discern, with reason, what is true for themselves. In the same vein, Phill Kline of the Amistad Project, often says, “A country that wants to be free has to be full of people who have the courage to speak for the freedom of those with whom they disagree”.
In short, in order to remain free, we must be free to think and speak without fear of reprisal. And, in order to protect these liberties, they must be universally protected, not selectively protected for those who agree with the current political or financial power.
Martin Luther King Jr. (may have) said it best:
“All we say to America is to be true to what you said on paper. If I lived in China or even Russia, or any other totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions. Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they haven’t committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right.”
America has never been perfect, but in our pursuit of a more perfect union, we must acknowledge the founding principles that led to our historic achievements. MLK recognized the power of free speech, uniquely valued in the United States, and he used it to bring about lasting change that improved our country. However, this essential principle is now in danger under the guise of “fighting disinformation”. If we give up our rights to a few individuals, we risk moving towards a path of totalitarianism, just as our founding fathers warned us. Now is not the time to become apathetic, but rather alert and determined to protect our fundamental liberties.