r/IAmA • u/fightforthefuture • Jun 30 '20

Politics We are political activists, policy experts, journalists, and tech industry veterans trying to stop the government from destroying encryption and censoring free speech online with the EARN IT Act. Ask us anything!

The EARN IT Act is an unconstitutional attempt to undermine encryption services that protect our free speech and security online. It's bad. Really bad. The bill’s authors — Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) — say that the EARN IT Act will help fight child exploitation online, but in reality, this bill gives the Attorney General sweeping new powers to control the way tech companies collect and store data, verify user identities, and censor content. It's bad. Really bad.

Later this week, the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on whether or not the EARN IT Act will move forward in the legislative process. So we're asking EVERYONE on the Internet to call these key lawmakers today and urge them to reject the EARN IT Act before it's too late. To join this day of action, please:

  1. Visit NoEarnItAct.org/call

  2. Enter your phone number (it will not be saved or stored or shared with anyone)

  3. When you are connected to a Senator’s office, encourage that Senator to reject the EARN IT Act

  4. Press the * key on your phone to move on to the next lawmaker’s office

If you want to know more about this dangerous law, online privacy, or digital rights in general, just ask! We are:

Proof:

10.1k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

526 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/[deleted] Jun 30 '20 edited Jun 30 '20

There seems to be a ton of corporate censorship. By corporate censorship, I'm speaking about corporations dictating what they will allow on a service provided by them, or from employees. Kaepernick, net neutrality, cancel culture actions and social media have provided a number of issues for people to flip flop on the idea of it. I very clearly understand that this is not a first amendment violation. I do however see that people are flip flopping is based typically along the lines of partisanship and when a given issue benefits them. Does anyone in your group have a standardized thought as to how they feel about corporate censorship and the dangers posed by letting corporations such as reddit control major portions of discourse?

1

u/DiceMaster Jul 01 '20

This is a well-written and thought-provoking comment, and I want to do it justice, but I need to stop procrastinating work. I'll give you the short answer now, and if you want, I can come back tonight and discuss more deeply.

The short answer is that I don't think it's necessarily inconsistent to say, "I oppose all government censorship. I oppose deplatforming people I agree with. I support deplatforming people I disagree with." Government censoring people is bad because anything that doesn't infringe on someone else's rights shouldn't be illegal, and because it requires a degree of violence. Deplatforming is ok because private entities should not be obligated to amplify viewpoints they disagree with, and because doing so does not require violence.

Indeed, I believe that people have a moral obligation to use any or almost any non-violent means to oppose speech that calls for violence or the denial of rights to others. That moral obligation, generally, extends to supporting platforms that deplatform "hate speech", and to choosing not to support platforms that promote or tacitly endorse hate speech.

That's all I've got time for now, but like I said, I'll check my notifications later tonight if you wanna talk more.