Introduction
A federal judge has dismissed X's attempt to block a new California law that regulates online content moderation. This ruling means that X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, will have to comply with the new regulations and disclose how it reviews hate speech and other objectionable content.
The California Law: AB 587
AB 587, signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in November, applies to social media companies with an annual revenue exceeding $100 million. These companies are now required to publicly post their terms of service, including information about their content moderation practices. Additionally, they must submit two reports each year to the state's Attorney General, providing statistics on actions taken to moderate hate speech, racism, extremism, radicalization, disinformation, misinformation, harassment, and foreign political interference.
X's Lawsuit and Argument
Last September, X filed a lawsuit against the state of California, claiming that AB 587 violated the company's freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment and California's state constitution. X argued that the law compelled social media companies to express positions on controversial and politically charged issues, which infringed upon their rights.
Judge's Ruling and Decision
However, on Thursday, the judge rejected X's petition for a preliminary injunction, which would have prevented the implementation of AB 587. The judge determined that the reporting requirement placed a significant compliance burden on social media companies but was justified and not unduly burdensome within the scope of First Amendment law. He emphasized that the required disclosures were factual and uncontroversial, as they consisted of objective data regarding the company's actions.
Implications for X
This ruling means that X must comply with the California law and disclose its content moderation practices. Despite Musk's previous opposition to content moderation policies, X will now be held accountable for ensuring that its platform addresses hate speech and other objectionable content. The decision also highlights the increasing scrutiny and regulation of social media platforms in relation to content moderation.
Musk's Stance on Content Moderation
Elon Musk, since acquiring X, has positioned himself as a "free speech absolutist" and has been critical of content moderation policies. He has made controversial decisions, such as reinstating the accounts of users who had violated the platform's previous rules on inciting violence and spreading misinformation. Musk himself has been involved in disputes with advertisers, accusing them of suppressing free speech. However, he has since apologized for a tweet that was widely criticized as antisemitic.
Conclusion
The dismissal of X's petition for a preliminary injunction means that the company will have to comply with California's AB 587 and disclose its content moderation practices. This ruling sets a precedent for increased transparency and regulation of social media platforms, emphasizing the importance of addressing hate speech and other objectionable content online.
—————————————————————————————————————————————
By: ktangalakislippert@businessinsider.com (Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert)
Title: California Law Requires X to Reveal Content Moderation Practices
Sourced From: www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-x-content-moderation-polices-california-law-ab587-2023-12
Published Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2023 03:47:28 +0000
Related posts:
Linda Yaccarino quelled concerns about content moderation on Twitter. Disney, Microsoft and NBA now have their ads displayed next to neo Nazi material.
Elon Musk says Twitter has no ‘actual choice’ when complying with authoritarian government requests to restrict content
Jack Dorsey apologises for his Twitter moderation, claiming he’s done the wrong things for the internet’ and society’. However, at the time he said his decisions were right things’.
Twitter Blue by Elon Musk violates European rules regarding unfair business practices. The agency from the EU claims that Twitter Blue fails to reveal its full cost to consumers immediately.
Leave a Reply