When you ban a message from Team Trump three months before a presidential election, there ought to be a very good reason. After all, you are essentially censoring the president of the United States. You're telling voters: you are not allowed to see this message.
Continue Reading Below
Well, it’s come to this: Facebook and Twitter took down a Trump video post in which he had said children are "almost immune from this disease," the virus. That is considered "harmful misinformation." Before it was taken down, it was viewed 450,000 times. Were those people put in danger? Were they harmed? Is our society at risk because of those few words?
I don't think so. What those people saw was a statement of fact: children are less susceptible to the virus. They are less likely to get it. Viewers saw the president discussing back to school; re-opening the schools is a big election issue. And so is his performance on the virus, and yet he's censored, that is, silenced.
Whatever happened to Facebook as a free speech platform? Mark Zuckerberg took that position. He told Congress last week that Facebook aims "to be a platform for all ideas."
I guess he caved. He has now censored the president's campaign. It makes you wonder who really runs Facebook. Just who decided that saying children are "almost immune" is "harmful misinformation"? And why did they do it?
In the words of the president's deputy press secretary: "another day, another display of Silicon Valley's flagrant bias against this president, where the rules are only enforced in one direction."
Adapted from Stuart Varney's "My Take" monologue on "Varney & Co." on Aug. 6, 2020.