Pallone: GOP States, Not Tech, Responsible for Censorship

Pallone said he's “deeply disappointed” Republicans chose to focus the hearing on alleged social media censorship instead of having a “serious” discussion about how to modernize Communications Decency Act Section 230. The Republican Party is "responsible for some of the most egregious First Amendment violations and censorship we have witnessed in years," he said, referring to state laws on books and book banning. Committee Republicans invited several witnesses claiming Big Tech censorship.

Tech platforms are flagging, banning and suppressing right-wing users, a form of censorship comparable to activity in China, said House Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash. Section 230 is “outdated” and lacks the nuance required for modern communication, said House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Bob Latta, R-Ohio.

Members of both parties agreed Section 230 needs to be updated, but they focused on separate matters, with Republicans repeatedly circling back to censorship. House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Doris Matsui, D-Calif., focused on political extremism, conspiracy theories and hate speech. If anyone is censoring content, it’s Republican-led states, said Pallone. He accused the Republican witnesses of engaging in “pseudoscience” to discount COVID-19 findings.

Stanford University health policy professor Jay Bhattacharya said he was banned from Twitter for arguing against unverified COVID-19 information. There should be restrictions on the ability of government officials to use Section 230 to try to censor scientific debate online, he said. The government worked to create an illusion of consensus from the scientific community, which harmed the health and well-being of every American, including businesses trying to survive and students unable to interact in person, he said. He told the committee he had no recourse with Twitter until Elon Musk bought the platform. Musk invited him to visit Twitter headquarters, and he discovered he had been placed on a blacklist the day he joined Twitter.

Matsui raised concerns about the neutrality of algorithms, saying Congress needs to change the way it frames the Section 230 debate because of the role of algorithms. Congress should consider a Section 230 carve-out so platforms can’t use it to skirt civil rights laws, said George Washington University Law School professor Spencer Overton. He accused Airbnb and Vrbo of using Section 230 as a shield to avoid following public accommodation laws, which hotel chains must follow.

Seth Dillon, CEO of the Babylon Bee, said his company’s account was kicked off Twitter for eight months. The company was asked to delete a tweet and admit it engaged in “hateful conduct.” Dillon said it refused: “I don’t censor myself. I say what I think.” The Babylon Bee’s account was allegedly suspended for failing to remove a tweet about Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary Rachel Levine, who identifies as a transgender woman. The Bee jokingly awarded Levine a “Man of the Year” award in 2022. The platform labeled the tweet as “hateful conduct.”

Bhattacharya told the panel he has censored himself to avoid getting banned on social media, and other academics told him they have done the same. Congress is going to have a difficult time legislating content moderation practices, so it should consider creating more transparency standards for social media, said Environmental Progress founder Michael Shellenberger. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., suggested Congress is going to need to solve these Section 230 issues because she expects the U.S. Supreme Court to kick the statute back to the legislative branch without any alterations in its Gonzalez and Taamneh cases (see 2303060054).