Friday, January 8, 2021

Mark Zuckerberg has Neither Competence, Nor Standing, to Censor Anything, part 1

         Even the Supreme Court, as the highest body of judges in America, bind themselves to the objective standard of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Although Mark Zuckerberg (MZ) is not a legislator, his media empire, Facebook, carries influential weight that was sufficient to, along with Google, overthrow our recent Presidential election.  Consequently, MZ continues to be in complete violation (in spirit) of the First Amendment which states,

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of people to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On Thursday, January 7, the day after the Jan. 6 riots, Mark Zuckerberg tweeted with respect to President Donald Trump’s conduct, official statement, and his alleged motives:

The shocking events of the last 24 hours clearly demonstrate that President Donald Trump intends to use his remaining time in office to undermine the peaceful and lawful transition of power to his elected successor, Joe Biden…His decision to use his platform to condone rather than condemn the actions of his supporters at the Capitol building has rightly disturbed people in the US and around the world. We removed these statements yesterday because we judged that their effect -- and likely their intent -- would be to provoke further violenceFollowing the certification of the election results by Congress, the priority for the whole country must now be to ensure that the remaining 13 days and the days after inauguration pass peacefully and in accordance with established democratic norms…Over the last several years, we have allowed President Trump to use our platform consistent with our own rules, at times removing content or labeling his posts when they violate our policies. We did this because we believe that the public has a right to the broadest possible access to political speech, even controversial speech. But the current context is now fundamentally different, involving use of our platform to incite violent insurrection against a democratically elected government…We believe the risks of allowing the President to continue to use our service during this period are simply too great. Therefore, we are extending the block we have placed on his Facebook and Instagram accounts indefinitely and for at least the next two weeks until the peaceful transition of power is complete.[1]

It is firstly vital to highlight several highly questionable aspects of his tweet.  Since I have listened entirely to Trump’s speech that preceded the riot, I am qualified to conclude:

·                  Zuckerberg’s assertion that Trump purposes “To undermine the peaceful and lawful transition of power to his elected successor…” is false.  His purpose was instead to investigate substantiated allegations that the vote itself was fraudulent.  Yet on Jan. 7 at 7:10 pm, in light of the Senatorial vote the night before, Trump promised a peaceful transition to his successor, Joe Biden’s Presidency.[2]

·                  Zuckerberg’s assertion that Trump’s “intent” was “to provoke further violence,” is false.  To the contrary, Trump several times in his speech he said they would be walking to the Capitol peacefully.”  Indeed Trump also explicitly decried the conduct of the rioters and assured the audience that the violent ones were not part of his following.[3]  Indeed, it is striking that the damaging rioting was entirely inconsistent with the conduct of attendees to every other rally.

·                  For these reasons it is reckless for MZ to assume Trump’s goal is to “invite violent insurrection.”


To be continued...



[1] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/facebook-blocks-trump-indefinitely-capitol-riot-response

[2] https://www.livemint.com/news/world/trump-promises-smooth-transition-of-the-new-govt-condemns-capitol-attack-11610066149375.html

[3] Ibid.

No comments:

Post a Comment