Zuckerberg “Should Pay A Price”: Clinton Denounces Facebook For Refusing To Censor Political Ads

I recently published a column on the effort by Democrats to get Facebook and other companies to implement a system of censorship of political ads, which would be entirely unconstitutional if carried out by the government. Now, Hillary Clinton has declared that Mark Zuckerberg “should pay a price” for the damage that he is doing to democracy. It is a curious argument since, according to Clinton, Zuckerberg is apparently harming democracy by not curtailing free speech by censoring political speech. I have previously criticized President Donald Trump for his own anti-free speech and anti-free press rhetoric.

I will not repeat the prior arguments in my column on why private censorship is a far greater danger than misleading or inaccurate political statements. However, I have previously criticized Clinton for her poor record on free speech, including her support for a thinly veiled blasphemy resolution in the United Nations. Clinton has never been viewed as a strong ally to free speech.

Yet, the demand for corporate censorship of political ads has magnified this long-standing concern. Speaking in New York at a screening of The Great Hack, a Netflix documentary, Clinton lashed out at Facebook. She asked “When Facebook is the principal news source for more than half of the American people, and the only source of news that most of them pay any attention to, and if it announces that it has no responsibility for the airing of false ads … how are you supposed to get accurate information about anything, let alone candidates running for office?”

The answer is that you also have access to Facebook and you can rebut false or misleading statements. It is called free speech.

Clinton then strongly suggested that she believed that this was part of a scheme, though stopping short of her signature “vast right-wing conspiracy” allegation: “If I were of a conspiratorial mindset, I might suggest that there seems to be some connection.” She warned of continued “manipulation of information” by “incredibly wealthy people who believe they can do whatever they want to do”.

She insisted that “[Facebook founder] Mark Zuckerberg should pay a price for what he is doing to our democracy.”

What is striking is that Clinton still believes that it was all of these outside and unseen forces that cost her the election as opposed to her own problems in connecting with voters. After the election, Clinton alternatively blamed sexismracismself-hating womendomineering boyfriendsRussian hackersBernie Sanders, and of course, James Comey.  The most obvious reason is that Clinton remains a highly unpopular figure and was viewed as inauthentic on the campaign by many.  Many of us were critical when the Democratic establishment (and virtually every Democratic member of Congress) all but guaranteed the nomination of Clinton despite every poll showing her to be unpopular and the voters seeking an anti-establishment choice. Most recently, her accusation of long-time critic Tulsi Gabbard as a “Russian asset” has led to a chorus of denunciations. The fact is that Clinton was one of the few politicians that could have lost to Trump in 2016, who was the most unpopular Republican nominee in modern history. It was not Facebook’s refusal to engage in corporate censorship.

The continued call for a system of censorship is chilling for the free speech community. It is now becoming mainstream as free speech recedes into quagmire of our poisonous political environment.

60 thoughts on “Zuckerberg “Should Pay A Price”: Clinton Denounces Facebook For Refusing To Censor Political Ads”

  1. Again you see the socialist version of truth as Clinton proves she was and is unfit to be a citizen in our Constitutional Republic much less be allowed into a position where she can apply her socialist fascist beliefs.

    1. For the record I do not do social media it is far to socialist mindless for me. I will instead stick to being a self governing citizen using thinking and reasoning instead of Zuckerbergs unacceptable offerings. But he still outclassed Clinton.

      1. Hillary is to the right of Nixon

        Almost makes me want to drive up to Yorba Linda to see if it is true. 😉

        Clinton right wingers hate Sanders genius and would rather see Trump reelected.

        Oh, so many questions. How do you define right wing? Where are you finding any right wing Clinton supporters? What is Sanders genius? What evidence do you have to indicate your identified group hates Sanders? What evidence do you have any Clinton supporter would rather see Trump elected than Sanders?

        1. Clinton’s pushed more republican policies than any republicans ever including putting more people into prison than any other country on the planet.

          Hillary Clinton was pro free trade and pro wars

          Trump ran to the left of Hillary Clinton.

          Trump and Hillary were the 2 most hated candidates in the history of the country meanwhile Sanders beat all of Obama’s records for crowds and donations.

  2. U.S. politicians wield the greatest existential threat to the liberty and freedom retained by Americans. Yet, Americans tend to be politicians’ best enablers.

    1. Darren, that should have been written into the DoI.

      There’s a destructive co-dependency that has always and will always result in a loss of liberty and freedom for the American people. I used to believe it was avoidable, but history doesn’t prove that to be true. Jefferson wrote: That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, That’s not an if but when. He writes further: all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. The American people apparently are not there yet. We may be close though. 🙂

  3. I will not repeat the prior arguments in my column on why private censorship is a far greater danger than misleading or inaccurate political statements.

    Hmm? You don’t say. Let’s go to the wayback machine to see what our very own Professor Turley advocates regarding private censorship.

    Posted by Turley today: I do not like the fliers and would have strongly encouraged a student not to post them.

    The Hildabeast approves your message Turley.

  4. WHO’S ON TURLEY’S FACEBOOK STREAM?

    It could be Professor Turley’s Facebook stream is limited to responsible conservatives, lawyers and academics. Therefore the professor has possibly not seen the true, abusive potential of Facebook during an election year.

    But ‘my’ Facebook stream became a sewer of misinformation during the 2016 campaign. The Bernie Bros, more than anyone, were posting false news stories and memes; all of which was targeted at Hillary.

    People have forgotten that the term ‘fake news’ originally applied to phony articles from nonexistent newspapers that flooded Facebook during the 2016 campaign. And again, Hillary was always the target of these bogus news stories.

    Critics often claim that Hillary Clinton and her supporters are ‘mean’. But during the 2016 campaign, I never saw any disinformation targeted at Sanders or Trump. It was all aimed at Hillary in vast quantities. And much of it was coming from foreign troll.

    So Professor Turley may not have seen just how bad Facebook really got.

  5. ask not why Hillary acts like many a craven politician has since time immemorial, ask instead what’s wrong with human society that we can’t get a grip on culling these wolves in sheepskins from the herd

    Plato worked on the problem well, but not much progress has been made since, I think sometimes

  6. “What is striking is that Clinton still believes that it was all of these outside and unseen forces that cost her the election as opposed to her own problems in connecting with voters. After the election, Clinton alternatively blamed sexism, racism, self-hating women, domineering boyfriends, Russian hackers, Bernie Sanders, and of course, James Comey. The most obvious reason is that Clinton remains a highly unpopular figure and was viewed as inauthentic on the campaign by many.

    I’ve never seen Hillary Clinton as anything but an authentic sociopath.

    1. Loupgarous,
      And, she is tone deaf to how comments like

      “She warned of continued “manipulation of information” by “incredibly wealthy people who believe they can do whatever they want to do”.”

      reflect on her.

  7. Why has Donald Trump failed to lock up already this Homicidal Maniac, Hillary Clinton & her friends???

    There have been few insane nut jobs ever in the world like Hillary Clinton.

    Back on the subject of Facebook & other big tech censorship of “Free Speech” :

    Maybe it’s not the case but what I seem to be seeing is Prof Turley has been giving a piss poor argument in favor of certain Free Speech Rights in the US within Tech companies. Maybe I’m mistaken.

    I hear many people say: Well Facebook, Google/Youtube, Apple, Twitter, etc…, those are private companies & as such they can censor whomever that wish.

    That is false on at least a couple of levels.

    With at least FB/Google they started out funded through US taxpayer money. They & the other giant Co., they are all illegal gathering & selling all our “Private Property” ie: our words/thoughts to govts around the world in order, say in the USA, to get around that pesky Constitution & it’s Citizen’s Sovereign Rights, like the 1st, 4th, 5th,… etc., 9th, 10th.

    Constitutional expert Attorney Robert Barnes & others explain to us, unlike Turley, I feel, that Facebook/Google/Apple/Twitter/etc., can not legally continue to censor people like Trump supporters/Christians/Conservatives/2amd/ etc..

    That they are currently operating under the 1996 FCC community decency act, section 230, that unconstitutional grants them liability immunity.

    That under Sec. 230 those private companies get the immunity because they claim they are a “Public Commons” where almost no one can be censored & everyone can post.

    Ck: SC rulings/Public Commons.

    If on the other hand those private companies do wish to continue Commie/Nazi/Hillary/Dim/Rino type censorship they can, but they’ll have to surrender up their liability immunity as a Public Commons & in turn they have become publishers in which they are libel.

    The question I have is why the hell hasn’t Trump/DOJ already pulled the trigger on this issue & declared those companies Publishers untell they stop their mass censorship.

    Alex Jones/ Barnes & think 3 other law firms prepared the legal docs/case for the Trump admin., almost a 1 1/2 ago asking for him/his admin to take action & so far nothing but some fake alt news Sebastian Gorka in a pissin contest W/CNN & playboy reporter in which the topic of the WH event was completely lost… Months Ago & Crap for Action out of Trump!!!

    Bare in mind we need to also bring into this censorship issue is the 1934 FCC act. Corporations under it are supposed to provide a public good, ie; ABC/CBS/NBC/PBS/NPR/etc…. This will have to wait for now.

  8. Someone above referred to “Hilldog”. That is an affront to all dogs. That aside I think this blog should censor out any photos of the Hillary rat. Oh, that is an affront to rats.

  9. I’m not too concerned or worried about Crooked Hillary’s veiled threat against Mark Zuckerberg…

    After All

    Mr Zuckerberg did “build that wall” around his fortress!

  10. Censorship by media corporations has been going on for a very long time. They censor the truth! Sorry guys but this whole ohhhh someone wants to censor, “those horrible Dems…this must stop” is ridiculous. I’m against censorship and I’m against forgetting what’s real. Oppose censorship and oppose lying. You can do both.

  11. There’s not much the left and right agrees on these days, but I think we might be able to bond over the idea that we want this woman and her husband to just go away. We don’t know everything they did with the Clinton Foundation cash, the emails, or the harassment and rape charges, but I think most Americans would let them get away with everything, even in the court of public opinion, if they would just go away.

    1. Assuming Trump is fully impeached, he would win the entire EC vote if he ran on a platform of having Hillary hung, drawn and quartered

      Insert Adam Schiff parody here

  12. This ghastly megalomaniac is – per Anon1, Natacha, and Peter Shill – the optimal candidate for President.

  13. Fun watching the old lady hanging around at the trough, hoping to be picked up.

    Her unique blend of low class and strident self promotion is entertaining.

    Wonder if the Dems will fall for her charms a third time.

    1. monument…………The image of Hillary “hanging around at the trough” is a good one…..and actually, in my opinion, a somewhat powerful one.
      It reminds me of the “woman at the well” story in the New Testament.
      Not sure Jesus will show up this time, but it’s not for me to say 😊

      1. And still not the architect of the “Libyan Spring” and co-creator of ISIS. For that you need self-promoting old sociopaths like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, the worst Secretaries of State since John Foster Dulles.

      2. Aw come on now Justice Holmes…Trump is the greatest president this country has ever seen. Winning for America! Amazing! And so entertaining! Look at lowest unemployment numbers ever for all groups. More Americans working than ever — including blacks, hispanics, whites, all groups. And look at how many DC sports teams are now winners during Trump years. Trump likes winners. Coincidence? I think not.

Leave a Reply