House Republicans are introducing two pieces of legislation aimed at preventing the federal government from working with Big Tech to suppress free speech under the guise of combating “disinformation.”
The bills seek to expand the Hatch Act, which bars federal employees from engaging in political activities in their official positions, and to require a report to Congress on all instances of government agencies suppressing lawful free speech on social media and other platforms.
According to Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., the legislation is necessary to protect Americans’ First Amendment rights, which have been eroded by the Biden administration’s alleged pressure on social media companies to censor certain views and news.
Comer and other lawmakers cite examples such as White House press secretary Jen Psaki’s statements flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s admission that his company censored news articles about Hunter Biden after the FBI reached out.
Republicans have criticized the Biden administration for labeling “inconvenient facts” as “disinformation” or “misinformation” to stifle speech on social media platforms. The Oversight Committee is also investigating an alleged “blacklist” of conservative news outlets run by the British Global Disinformation Institute, which the State Department reportedly paid $330,000 in taxpayer money.
Biden’s federal agencies have been ramping up efforts to monitor and counteract disinformation on social media platforms, particularly on topics such as COVID-19 origins, the Afghanistan withdrawal, and foreign adversaries attempting to influence U.S. elections. However, Republicans argue that the administration is attempting to silence conservative or opposing viewpoints.
The proposed legislation seeks to make any form of censorship by a federal government official an illegal federal personnel activity subject to disciplinary action, and to prohibit senior federal officials, including political appointees, from engaging in censorship in their personal capacities.
The bills are not without controversy, with some arguing that they could limit the government’s ability to combat disinformation and foreign interference. Others have noted that the legislation appears to be politically motivated, aimed at protecting conservative voices and viewpoints.
Regardless of the outcome of the bills, the debate over free speech and the role of Big Tech in regulating it is likely to continue. As social media platforms become increasingly central to political discourse, the question of who gets to determine what constitutes “disinformation” and what speech is protected under the First Amendment will remain a contentious one.
