Social Media Censorship Bill Signed By FL Governor Takes Into Effect Today

Image obtained from Unsplash

Samantha Vargas / Contributing Writer

A bill signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis aims to tackle censorship by major social media companies which goes into effect today, has sparked debate throughout the country.

Following its passage on May 24, many have expressed concern the bill may violate the First Amendment rights of private companies. 

“Any Floridian can block any candidate they don’t want to hear from, and that is a right belonging to each citizen,” DeSantis said during the signing, “…But it’s not for Big Tech to be weighing in on these elections and picking the candidates that have the right to speak and those that should be silenced.”

Senate Bill 7072 will fine tech companies $250,000 per day if they deplatform a politician running for state-wide office. The fine is reduced to $25,000 per day if the politician is running for a non-statewide office.

The bill gives any Floridian the right to sue social media companies they feel have censored them.

The governor signed the bill at a press conference at FIU, where he told attendees that Florida residents who file lawsuits against social media companies for deplatformization may receive as much as $100,000 in damages for each proven claim. 

The bill also requires social media platforms to give a detailed explanation for the suspension or banishment of a user. They will also be obligated to inform users of changes to their terms of service or policies, which was not required before this bill. DeSantis stated this would prevent companies from “moving the goalposts”. 

Florida is the first state to pass a bill of this nature. However, it is already being challenged. One lawsuit was filed by the Computer Communications and Industry Association and Netchoice, a lobbying group which includes members such as Twitter, Google, and Amazon. 

Now that a state bill was passed to combat this issue, many wonder if the lawsuit already filed and those that are expected to come once it is enforceable on July 1 could kill the bill or any of its provisions. 

FIU Law Professor Hannibal Travis, source: FIU Law directory

Hannibal Travis, a law professor at FIU who specializes in internet law, said the bill has strengths and weaknesses. He pointed out that an exemption that is made for companies who operate theme parks may strengthen arguments of First Amendment violations within the bill.

This exception raises some questions on why the free speech of companies like Facebook and Youtube is being treated differently than similar speakers such as Disney or Comcast simply because they run theme parks. 

“Why does somebody who owns a theme park have greater editorial interest [legal right to edit content on their platforms] than someone who doesn’t,” Travis said, “A court might look skeptically at that provision and many people have cited that as a big problem.”

This carve out for companies who run theme parks may strengthen the arguments of those challenging the bill. Any special interests attached to that carve out may validate claims of a first Amendment violation. 

Additionally, in previous cases regarding censorship of individuals by social media companies, courts have ruled in favor of private companies. However, Travis believes whether the ruling of those cases apply to this law is debatable. 

Last week, in a ruling of 21-20, the House Judiciary Committee approved a six part antitrust bill called the “Ending Platform Monopolies Act”. This bill, if passed in its entirety, would ban big tech companies from self-preferencing on their online marketplaces, restrict them from absorbing their competitors, and prevent them from owning a line of business that may disadvantage competitors. 

This bill is just one recent example of state and local governments legally challenging big tech companies despite laws that have protected them from lawsuits in the past. 

When it comes to the widely discussed topic of how successful these lawsuits could be in court, Travis believes it could become complicated once it comes to actually appealing against the bill.

“Probably in the [federal trial court], I suspect the people challenging the law may win a significant part of their challenge,” Travis said, “but when it goes up on appeal, that’s when you’ll see…differences of opinion.”

Travis referred to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who has voiced his criticism of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the landmark law that gives tech companies the power to safeguard what is said on their sites as well as protects them from lawsuits. 

Travis believes that federal statute may also prove to be an obstacle for the bill’s defense in court.

“That seems to be a conflict between federal and state law, and in those conflicts the federal law usually wins,” Travis said, “You don’t even need the First Amendment, just the federal statute would win if there is a true conflict.”

So, how could this bill affect every day Floridians like those who attend and work at FIU? And more importantly, how do students at FIU feel about this bill?

Jennifer Diaz, a senior majoring in psychology at FIU, is concerned about censorship on social media platforms, but does not support this new Florida bill. 

“I see that [censorship on social media] happens a lot, especially when it comes to politics,” Diaz said. She expressed her concern for certain posts that get censored as misinformation regarding Covid-19 and political issues on platforms like Instagram. 

Diaz also said there is a transparency problem from major tech companies regarding how they operate and make decisions. However, she has an issue with how Florida lawmakers are deciding to tackle these problems, such as the fines against these private companies.

“The fines that [tech companies] will get…the $250,000, it feels like a lot,” Diaz said.

She also criticized the requirement for thorough explanations for bans on social media sites. 

“The government should run the government and the tech companies should run the tech companies,” Diaz said.

In a small poll conducted on PantherNOW’s Instagram page, 51% of participants said they were not concerned about censorship when using social media, while 49% said they were. 

Results of poll conducted on PantherNOW’s Instagram page regarding censorship on social media.

Results of poll conducted on PantherNOW’s Instagram page regarding censorship on social media.

Results of the poll, although they may not reflect the views of the entirety of students of FIU, show a near split between opinions on the topic.

Travis believes this bill could have a major impact if enforced in the long run. Social media companies may have to change the way they operate in a way that doesn’t include algorithms that decide what content appears on users’ feeds for them.

“For example, if there is this shadow banning algorithm that deprioritizes alleged misinformation…and then this law says you cannot shadow ban people, then they seem to have to at least offer the option of an unsanitized feed,” Travis said.

He pointed out that it may also cause those who usually censored themselves online to avoid suspension or deletion to be more outspoken. This may sound positive for many, but could have it’s negative consequences for others. 

“There’s already too much expression of hatred and discrimination on…not only but particularly anonymous platforms,” Travis said, “If you somehow have a safety valve from even the platform’s own standards, that might make that problem even worse.”

The bill comes amid rising concerns about censorship on social media, mainly towards conservatives.

This issue was amplified after various social media sites banned Former President Donald Trump, accusing him of condoning the Capitol insurrection on January 6th through his Twitter account. Since then, many conservative lawmakers have called for legal action against censorship by social media companies. 

Senate Bill 7072 is set to go into effect on July 1. More lawsuits are anticipated to arise once the bill is enforced. It is also anticipated that other states may follow suit. 

“It starts in Florida, but it’s not going to end in Florida,” DeSantis said while signing the bill, “And I think we’re going to have a huge movement behind us.”

Be the first to comment on "Social Media Censorship Bill Signed By FL Governor Takes Into Effect Today"

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*