Dakota Beacon

I received my banned book today. Amazon banned it from its website so I went to Christianbooks.com. In February I ordered “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment” by Ryan T. Anderson, 2018. Heavy demand delayed my backordered book.

Anderson, a Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, took his bachelor’s degree from Princeton University and his PhD. from Notre Dame University. His research has been cited by two US Supreme Court justices in two different SCOTUS cases. Amazon banned his good work over woke.

Facebook recently removed a Wall Street Journal review of physicist Steven Koonin’s book “Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What it Doesn’t, and Why it Matters.” Flakey fact-checkers determined both book and review were misleading and ruled no one should see them.

Beyond Amazon’s refusal to sell Anderson’s book on its platform, consider Tik Tok’s ban of Prager University videos; Google and YouTube’s arbitrary threats to de-platform conservative sources; Twitter and Facebook’s nebulous and inconsistent policies about what is and is not “fake news.”

Twitter decided that the 89 million people who followed Trump’s account were not allowed to do so. Twitter also determined that it will not allow the National Archives to store preserved versions of the former president’s tweets. The question of whether the action was justified should be debatable; the question of whether it is tyrannical for Jack Dorsey alone to act as he did is not.

Firms see corporate banning not as censorship. Only governments can censor. Users have posts removed or banned by private firms because their viewpoint challenges dominant narratives.

Carelessly Big Tech advances the latent tendency within democracy to become tyrannical. It promotes cancel culture to justify its censorship. In concert with political allies it accomplishes what no government would be able to do -- censor.

Platforms still use Trump as an excuse, but it’s clear that bans are not solely about him. Trump no longer holds office. No doubt Big Tech and woke corporations seek to de-platform, delegitimize, marginalize, and silence millions of Americans who hold viewpoints at odds with themselves, corporate media, and the Democrat party. Market muscle was on full display when Apple, Google, and Amazon acted in concert to take out Parler, the alternative to Twitter.

That any content is banned because it “incites violence” is laughable when violent internet content is allowed to circulate daily. Facebook bans #stopthesteal but permits ISIS recruiting. Child sexual abuse and porn circulate but the platforms shrug off efforts tagging them as responsible.

The GOP base is frustrated because the Senate wasted four years at hearings and took no action. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell removed the last chance for action when he ignored Trump’s pleas to deal meaningfully with Section 230, Big Tech’s industry subsidy.

What should be done with Big Tech? We are not helpless. Unfortunately conservatives have not united around a single approach. Some even believe the status quo is acceptable.

Consider breaking up the Big Tech’s digital oligopolies. Their power and influence rival the big trusts and cartels that once controlled much of American industry. Antitrust legislation might address whether Amazon should be allowed to own Amazon Web Service (AWS). Should Facebook be allowed to own Instagram and WhatsApp and scores of other digital companies? Should Google be allowed to own YouTube and Android and DoubleClick? These companies constrain freedom of information which impacts free speech. Much like their 19th-century forebears, these oligopolies should be broken up.

Curtail Big Tech’s government contracts. Antitrust action is not the only remedy. Both Google and Amazon enjoy substantial federal contracts. AWS provides cloud computing for the CIA, for example. Contracts must be leveraged for better behavior.

Big Tech gets tax credits. Serious curtailment of corporate tyranny involves tackling the policies that prioritize tech companies over people. De-prioritize and end the billions in local, state, and federal tax payer subsidies, credits, and bailouts given to Big Tech. Deter their lobbying power.

Revise Big Tech’s legal carve-outs. Section 230, Big Tech’s congressionally granted legal immunity, should be reformed. Or, absent that, repeal it altogether.

What is Section 230? As law, it simply says that only internet users are responsible for what they write, not the private companies whose websites host comments. Second, it affirms what the First Amendment already implies -- that private internet companies don’t have to host speech that violates their values. This is just the opposite of radio, TV, and print media, who can be sued for their content.

Big Tech benefits from lax antitrust enforcement. This has effectively granted antitrust immunity to the giant tech companies who operate in many price-less markets. Their core services are “free” insomuch as you don’t transact in dollars for them (you pay, of course, with your data). Giving clear congressional direction to enforcement agencies, reforming the burden of proof in merger cases, and removing hurdles to enforcement when market power is clearly present would help protect users.

In short, revoke privileges when firms threaten pluralism and a free society. Instead, promote an America where the people rule — not the mob, not the tech titans, and not the corporate barons.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).