(c) As used in this section, "social media" means an electronic service or account, or electronic content, including, but not limited to, videos, still photographs, blogs, video blogs, podcasts, instant and text messages, email, online services or accounts, or Internet Web site profiles or locations.
Getting the picture?
It's a free speech killer.
If it passes, agencies of the California government will develop numerous regulations for enforcement, including penalties for "speech criminals."
Saying this bill violates the 1st Amendment of the Constitution is a vast understatement. The last time I looked, the Founders mentioned nothing about fact checkers or warnings attached to speech.
"Open borders and a flood of immigration into California are destructive to -- wait. My statement has been precluded by warnings and fact-checker overrides..."
Or: "VACCINES ARE DANGEROUS. Ahem, I am making a debatable assertion and I must warn you that official experts strenuously disagree with me, and furthermore, the California Fact Checkers United, a division of Merck-Snopes Thought Police, has determined that my assertion is groundless and harmful to children's health..."
There needs to be a relentless tsunami of protest in California over this Orwellian bill. I know of a number of Internet news operations in the state. They must jump in and lead the way.
In case you believe there are too many websites and blogs based in California to enforce a new draconian law, let me explain how the game works. Behind closed doors, the state government would decide to focus on a few big issues. For example, gun control, vaccines, and immigration. Enforcement agencies would go after the biggest Internet operations expressing politically unacceptable points of view on those subjects. At first. A spread of smaller operations would feel the heat later.
So-called fact checkers would come from government supported groups who agree with Official Positions. In other words, they wouldn't be fact checkers at all. They would be prime news fakers.
When it comes to the issue of vaccines, for example, they would cite the notoriously biased "experts" at the Centers for Disease Control, never mentioning that the CDC buys and sells $4 billion of vaccines a year.
If, 10 or 15 years ago, someone told you a bill like SB1424 was going to come before a state legislature for a vote, you would have thought you were listening to a Hollywood pitch for a sci-fi movie script.
But now it's real. It's here. Believe it.
CRUSH IT.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
5
4
2
