Holocaust survivor Susan Sontag, when asked, summed up her lesson from her struggle with a simple yet profound observation that 10% of any population is cruel, no matter what, and that 10% is merciful, no matter what, and that the remaining 80% could be moved in either direction.
The above observation has not just stood the test of time; it holds true for political ideologies and economic doctrines as well, as revolutionaries and public enemies over the ages have found out to their respective triumphs and desolations.
However, in the age of information and the Internet, social media has become the new battleground for conflicting subcultures to shape narratives and influence the 80% to write a preferred version of history.
This ongoing and intensifying conflict reached another flashpoint when House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Republican Jim Jordan, subpoenaed three government agencies on Friday, April 28, as part of investigations into alleged censorship.
This has followed subpoenas sent in February to chief executives of Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL), Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN),Apple Inc. (AAPL), Meta Platforms, Inc. (META), and Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) demanding information on how they moderate content on their online platforms.
In this article, we will get into the details of the subpoena, followed by an exploration of what regional and temporal differences in the definition of appropriateness and appropriateness in the limits of free speech mean for the business prospects of big tech companies. Continue reading "Subpoenas to Biden Agencies Over Social Media 'Censorship': Impact on Big Tech and Stock Market"
