Brazil's embattled president, Jair Bolsonaro has temporarily banned social media companies from regulating content. The Tropic's Trump has long been compared to our former president, each with their jarring and controversial style, along with their often unfiltered conservative views. But Bolsonaro now goes a step further, after claiming the only way he loses next year's election is if the election is rigged. What does Jair do? He takes steps to help ensure he can influence the narrative about himself and other political matters by passing his ban under the pretext to combat so-called "arbitrary removal" of accounts, profiles and content.
This brash and dangerous measure is the first time a country has stopped internet companies from taking down content that violates their rules. We consequently now witness the dangers of unchecked power. Indeed, Bolsonaro's decree should remind us of the value of our First Amendment and the steps our Constitution takes to protect speech. Certainly, President Biden, especially the weeks after the Afghanistan exit, might have enjoined such an power. But it is not clear Biden would take such measures even if he had the power to do so. Trump on the other hand, with his obvious love for the media, would have likely enjoyed the power Bolsonaro is now exercising. Should Bolsonaro's effort cause us to pause? Duh??? Sadly, I am fairly confident such efforts will one day be part of our future.
There can be no free speech without censorship.
Posted by: anon | September 11, 2021 at 01:58 AM
Not sure whether to smile or cry.
Posted by: Ediberto Roman | September 11, 2021 at 09:09 PM
Anon, I am pretty sure I know who you are, and wanted to know if you would be interested in submitting a piece for an immigration symposium I am organizing-- it's on the prospects of CIR. I would appreciate a diversity of perspectives. If I am correct re. your identity, I am sure you would write something provocative.
Posted by: Ediberto Roman | September 11, 2021 at 09:13 PM
Should the anonymity permitted on this site, lulling those who comment into a free expression of views, be used to then enable site operators to intimidate such persons with references to "I know who you are"? Perhaps you should follow up with, "I know what you did last summer." (In case you don't get the reference that was the title of a horror movie.)
This post was about "free speech." So ironic.
In all seriousness, the FL is mainly the situs of a monoculture, with little recognition by those who run it and use it of the narrow mindedness of their interests and posts. If the goal is to limit the entirety of the discussion to the talking points and approved views of the "progressives" and to stifle any diversity of viewpoints by intimidation tactics, why not forego the "I know who you are" gambit and just do away with the ability to post anonymously?
Posted by: anon | September 12, 2021 at 01:45 AM