Ah, Hillary Clinton is at it again, pushing for more government control over your screens. In her latest interview with CNN’s Michael Smerconish, the former Secretary of State put on her favorite hat as the self-appointed watchdog of the internet. Clinton made it clear she wants social media companies to ramp up content moderation—or else, she warns, “we lose total control.” And by “we,” it sure seems like she means the powers that be, not everyday Americans.
Sure, she mentioned that a few states, like California and New York, have made moves to regulate social media, but that’s not enough for Hillary. Nope, she’s got her sights set on federal action, which translates to more sweeping regulations from Washington. It’s almost like she’s forgotten that this country is supposed to value free speech. But in Hillary’s world, free speech takes a back seat when it threatens “control.” And don’t get me started on her use of “our children” as the justification—because when politicians need to clamp down on freedom, they always bring up the kids.
Clinton wants to repeal Section 230 of the Communications Act, a legal provision that prevents platforms like Facebook, Twitter (or X, or whatever it’s called now), and Instagram from being held liable for what users post. Section 230 has been called the backbone of the internet, but apparently, Hillary thinks it’s an outdated concept. She believes social media platforms are no longer “pass-throughs” and should be held responsible for what you post on your wall. Never mind that the internet thrives on free exchange and debate; Clinton is more worried about losing “control.”
Hillary Clinton warns that allowing free speech on social media means ‘we lose control’ https://t.co/nEZKK3rESH pic.twitter.com/FSLy15St93
— New York Post (@nypost) October 6, 2024
Now, let’s break this down: What Hillary is pushing for is a system where Big Tech monitors and filters every post, meme, and video to ensure it’s in line with whatever the powers in Washington decide is appropriate. She claims this is necessary to prevent real-life consequences. But isn’t it ironic that the same crowd that chants “trust the science” when it comes to certain issues suddenly loses faith in people’s ability to discern information for themselves when it comes to social media? The idea that we should just trust these companies and the government to decide what we can see and say? Yeah, that’s a big “no thanks” from a lot of Americans.
Of course, Clinton doesn’t stop there. She’s even advocating for schools to take away kids’ cell phones, suggesting that students turn in their devices at the school door. Sure, some schools have experimented with limiting phone use, but Clinton seems to envision a broader, more universal crackdown. It’s all part of her vision of a more tightly controlled society—one where the government has a bigger say in how people communicate and interact.
But let’s be real for a second. This isn’t just about kids in classrooms. It’s part of a larger agenda to rein in the tech giants and, by extension, the millions of people who use them to speak their minds. And here’s the kicker: Clinton’s proposals would give even more power to the same federal government she admits is “dysfunctional.” Because when has adding more government oversight ever fixed a problem in Washington?
Hillary: “We should be in my view, repealing something called Section 230, which gave platforms on the internet immunity … Whether it‘s Facebook or Twitter or X or Instagram, or TikTok, whatever they are, if they don‘t moderate & monitor the content we lose total control” pic.twitter.com/s3ymPSIkBZ
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) October 5, 2024
Clinton’s call for more control over online platforms comes off as another attempt to silence voices she and her allies don’t agree with. It’s like she’s still bitter about the Wild West of internet debates that didn’t always go her way. But millions of Americans believe that the answer to speech you don’t like is more speech—not less. Rather than handing the reins over to Big Tech censors or government regulators, how about trusting people to think for themselves, Hillary?
Ultimately, this whole interview is just another chapter in Clinton’s long-running narrative: the belief that Washington knows best and that, somehow, more regulation and less freedom will lead to a better society. But if history is any guide, those who are truly invested in freedom—free speech, free thought, and free choice—aren’t buying what she’s selling.