I am astonished at Elle Magazine's headline by Sandy Doyle.
A capable, independent, successful woman that speaks for women's rights is considered to be both a "princess" - I guess that's a derogatory title now - and "terrifying. This must be an optical illusion of some sort.
Social Media. Either allows information, or it does not and thus must shut down. The flow of information cannot be constricted and still be called "open". The right to free speech only applies to the government, private companies like Google, et al, can infringe upon the right to free speech because they are companies, and not government. That is their right.
Now, let me put it a different way - for contrast - if, say a wedding cake store makes the choice not to serve white frosted cakes, are they allowed to do so? What if an Indian couple wants a cake with white frosting; is that still okay? What if a Native American wants a cake with white frosting; is that still okay? What if an alternate lifestyle couple wants a cake with white frosting; is that still okay? What if an LGBT couple wishes a white frosting cake; is not having it (censoring the frosting available) acceptable?
It is not a simple thing, and the article is not going to answer it; but, it certainly poses the right questions.
HR 6393 Section 501 (e) says the duties of this special interagency committee shall be as follows:
(1) To counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence, including by exposing falsehoods, agents of influence, corruption, human rights abuses, terrorism, and assassinations carried out by the security services or political elites of the Russian Federation or their proxies.
(2) Such other duties as the President may designate for purposes of this section.
Most of today’s adult Americans grew up in a society whose citizens dreamed of perpetually improving outcomes: better jobs, fatter wallets, stronger government, finer culture, nicer families, smarter kids, all the usual fruits of progress.