The notion that allowing social media platforms to self-regulate is a debate about "free speech" is a ruse. What's really at stake is who controls the digital plumbing on which democracy depends, and whose interests are served.
When Maga oligarchs like Elon Musk control these platforms, the conversation around regulation is distorted by a cynical frame that pits liberal vigilance against the free-speech mantra of Silicon Valley's powerful elite. This framing conveniently ignores the elephant in the room: the concentration of digital power wielded by companies with ties to authoritarian leaders and radicalising networks.
The question isn't whether social media bans for under-16s are a slippery slope towards censorship; it's whether they're an opportunity to reassert democratic sovereignty over tech oligarchs who prioritise profit over public interest. The answer, unfortunately, is yes.
Musk's promotion of racist conspiracy theories and far-right insurrection on his personal megaphone raises fundamental questions about the governance of these platforms. Meanwhile, Palantir's ties to Trump's anti-immigration militia and its development of IT systems for sensitive government contracts demonstrate a direct link between Silicon Valley's interests and imperial coercion.
The current debate around social media bans barely scratches the surface of these issues. However, it does indicate growing awareness that the mass migration of human activity online is an epoch-defining political event, with default settings on platforms designed to serve corporate interests over citizens' well-being.
Regulation, in this context, isn't about stifling "free speech"; it's about safeguarding democratic norms and values. The concentration of digital power poses a unique challenge, one that requires a nuanced understanding of the interplay between state control, public interest, and private enterprise.
Ultimately, the stakes are clear: who controls the digital plumbing of democracy? Who serves whose interests? The simplistic framing around "free speech" obscures these questions, allowing tech oligarchs to maintain their grip on the digital infrastructure that underpins our society.
When Maga oligarchs like Elon Musk control these platforms, the conversation around regulation is distorted by a cynical frame that pits liberal vigilance against the free-speech mantra of Silicon Valley's powerful elite. This framing conveniently ignores the elephant in the room: the concentration of digital power wielded by companies with ties to authoritarian leaders and radicalising networks.
The question isn't whether social media bans for under-16s are a slippery slope towards censorship; it's whether they're an opportunity to reassert democratic sovereignty over tech oligarchs who prioritise profit over public interest. The answer, unfortunately, is yes.
Musk's promotion of racist conspiracy theories and far-right insurrection on his personal megaphone raises fundamental questions about the governance of these platforms. Meanwhile, Palantir's ties to Trump's anti-immigration militia and its development of IT systems for sensitive government contracts demonstrate a direct link between Silicon Valley's interests and imperial coercion.
The current debate around social media bans barely scratches the surface of these issues. However, it does indicate growing awareness that the mass migration of human activity online is an epoch-defining political event, with default settings on platforms designed to serve corporate interests over citizens' well-being.
Regulation, in this context, isn't about stifling "free speech"; it's about safeguarding democratic norms and values. The concentration of digital power poses a unique challenge, one that requires a nuanced understanding of the interplay between state control, public interest, and private enterprise.
Ultimately, the stakes are clear: who controls the digital plumbing of democracy? Who serves whose interests? The simplistic framing around "free speech" obscures these questions, allowing tech oligarchs to maintain their grip on the digital infrastructure that underpins our society.