Rochester political scientist says Americans should be worried when politicians discuss the need to control the media. The debate follows in the wake of targeted Russian misinformation campaigns on social media during the last general election. Congress is currently considering legislation that would regulate political advertising on social media.
In a published in the New York Times, Primo, the University鈥檚 Ani and Mark Gabrellian Professor and , writes:
“After raking tech executives over the coals over Russia鈥檚 use of social media to influence the presidential campaign, Senator Lindsey Graham told reporters, 鈥榃hat we need to do is sit down and find ways to bring some of the controls we have on over-the-air broadcast to social media to protect the consumer.鈥�
As a scholar who studies First Amendment issues and the ways in which campaign finance laws have been used to stifle speech under the pretext of safeguarding democracy, I get very nervous when politicians discuss the need for 鈥榗ontrols鈥� over the media to 鈥榩rotect鈥� us. The American people should be nervous, too.鈥�
Primo wrote in response to a New York Times front-page story titled (in the paper鈥檚 print edition on November 1) about the Senate Judiciary subcommittee鈥檚 hearing with executives from Facebook, Twitter, and Google about Russia鈥檚 election interference. The New York Times reported that while the tech giant bosses publicly acknowledged their companies鈥� role in Russia鈥檚 influence on the last presidential election, they offered 鈥渓ittle more than promises to do better.鈥� It was this reluctance that apparently frustrated lawmakers who had sought stronger promises that future US elections would be protected from the influence of foreign powers.
According to the Times story, Facebook came under particular scrutiny from the lawmakers after the social media company acknowledged a day before the hearings that possibly聽聽saw inflammatory political ads bought by a Kremlin-linked company. Just after the election, Facebook鈥檚 chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, had dismissed claims of fake news and foreign interference on its site as a 鈥渃razy idea,鈥� writes the Times.
