Willson/Hood
The late Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, once declared that "an open society [is] where we can engage in debates and disagreements publicly….” In the 21st Century, the concept of “publicly” has been drastically altered through the rise of advanced technology. No longer is “publicly” simply the town square. Now, it is also a virtual metaverse of endless capabilities and global reach. Through software applications like Instagram, Facebook, Youtube, X (formerly known as Twitter), and others, the public square has expanded faster and farther than Constitutional interpretation can keep up with. A study conducted by the Familial and Adolescent Health Survey estimates that American teenagers spend an average of 4.8 hours a day on social media platforms while the average adult spends around 2.5 hours. Consequently, the Reuters Institute calculates that the high traffic of these platforms have led them to becoming the number one news source for most Americans. Yet, the management of information on social media sites is highly contested and juggled between government and private corporation jurisdiction.
The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States reads, “Congress shall make no law…prohibiting the exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press….” As members of the Vision Party, we hold to the founder’s standard wholeheartedly and believe that neither the government, private corporations, or any entity should limit that right through online censorship out of concern for government pressure, corporate bias, and algorithmic influence. A current example of the “snowballing” type of overreach we, as the vision party, oppose is modern-day Russia. Limitations to the freedom of speech began as laws targeting “extremism” which slowly escalated into absolutism. Over time, the definition of “extremism” evolved, news organizations were pressured, and harsher restrictions were imposed. Now, laws exist penalizing journalists for even remotely criticizing the government and or their current war. Freedom of speech has been severely diminished in Russia all in the name of “security and safety.” Russia’s example shows the slippery slope that can occur when the government is allowed the ability to regulate speech and define what is dangerous or what is not. Similarly, the same problem exists and is only perpetuated if corporations are allowed to censor online discourse. The recent event of COVID-19 is a perfect instance of censorship by corporations based purely on what they believed was “harmful” information. Social media platforms like X, Facebook, and Youtube, banned accounts questioning mandates, removed posts discussing origin theories, and deleted videos that provided any other medical guidance other than WHO official policies. We believe it is the people’s role and right to decide what information to read and believe; returning personal responsibility and accountability to the people instead of the government or unchecked corporations.
The ideal of individual liberty is the vision the founders had when writing the First Amendment and should continue to be protected in the modern context. We understand harmful rhetoric can be put online; however, it is still the responsibility of each individual to be accountable for their own words and actions, as well as how they respond to others' words and actions. Furthermore, potential damage that may be caused is far outweighed by the damage to an open and free society by government or corporate censorship. The choice is clear: a society where people choose what to believe and take control over their own actions and words, or a society in which the government or corporations are in control, regulating what we as free people are allowed to say and express.