Why Florida Is Trying To Stop Big Tech Censorship

New Floridian legislation seeks to punish big tech companies for deplatforming politicians and candidates in political elections, with a new bill’s potential passage resulting in recurring fines for any bans imposed on those who are political figures.

In section 1, it reads the following:

“Social media platforms hold a unique place in preserving first amendment protections for all Floridians and should be treated similarly to common carriers. Social media platforms that unfairly censor, shadow ban, deplatform, or apply post-prioritization algorithms to Florida candidates, Florida users, or Florida residents are not acting in good faith. Social media platforms should not take any action in bad faith to restrict access or availability to Floridians. Social media platforms have unfairly censored, shadowbanned, deplatformed, and applied post-prioritization algorithms to Floridians.”

The bill, which can be found here, notes that social media companies should not be allowed to “willfully” deplatform any election candidate and that immunity should be applied throughout the entirety of their campaign. As a result, they call for the following:

”the social media platform may be fined $250,000 per day for a candidate for statewide office and $25,000 per day for a candidate for other offices.”

Similarly, it requires that companies give users a full report of why any censorship occurred if it were to do so, mandating that such a report be delivered within seven days of the ban. 

The bill has come to attention as part of a push to mitigate big tech’s power. After the Jan. 6 capital riots, which resulted in former President Trump’s removal from various online sites, conservatives began a push to decrease what they indicated was censorship on those who supported the GOP online. 

Accusations of bias against republicans are nothing new and add to the long list of potentially anti-democratic acts that tech platforms have perpetrated. 

On the other side of the political aisle, Democrats have argued that social media does not target conservatives, but conservatives are instead violating the terms and conditions at higher rates.

Most of this power comes from section 230 of the CDA, which allows for media forums to remove or censor any posts that they deem to be objectionable. 

The bill passed through the state’s house, and senate and will likely be confirmed upon renegotiation of some clauses, including the size of the fines.