Montana Lawmakers Seek to Protect Citizens from Bias of Big Tech

Pixabay


On March 2, the Montana House of Representatives nearly passed a bill that would have allowed the state to regulate social-media infringements on freedom of speech. Companies such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter would have been subjected to oversight and scrutiny by the Montana Public Service Commission that already regulates public utilities, railroads, energy companies, and other key industries. The measure failed by one vote. Public Service Commissioner Randall Pinocci was outraged that some “RINO Republicans” joined Democrats to kill the bill by a single vote. He said the bill was not introduced just to help Montana but to set a precedent for other states as well. There is still is a possibility of re-introducing the bill in a slightly different way for the Montana Senate. -GEG

Montana lawmakers and policymakers took their first big shot at “Big Tech” in what supporters described as an effort to stop and punish censorship and discrimination against social-media users.

The first shot missed, but not by much. And if officials who spoke with The Epoch Times are right, the state’s war against what many legislators view as abuse by Silicon Valley is just getting started.

On March 2, the Montana House of Representatives nearly passed a bill that would have allowed the state to regulate social-media infringements on freedom of speech. The measure failed by one vote.

Under the legislation, known as House Bill 573, companies such as Facebook and YouTube would have been subjected to oversight and scrutiny by the Montana Public Service Commission. Multiple commissioners, elected to regulate utilities and other interests, expressed support for the effort.

Lawmakers also stressed the significance of the plan, describing the bill as a necessary measure to protect the rights of Montanans from unaccountable corporate giants with what a number of legislators described as “extreme” political biases.

Read full article here…

Visit our Classified ads.

Check out our Classified ads at the bottom of this page.

Recent stories & commentary

  • Save
Freedom

Disengaging Entirely From the United Nations Debacle

December 4, 2024 Greg Reese 3

Laibow says that a treaty with the United Nations can not exist because the UN is not a sovereign state. In order to leave the UN, a letter from the head of state must be sent to the UN secretary general to withdraw membership. She said in Trump’s first term, he did not remove the US from the WHO as claimed.

Classified Ads

The appearance of ads on this site does not signify endorsement by the publisher. We cannot vouch for accuracy of statements or integrity of advertisers. We will investigate complaints, however, and remove any message we find to be misleading or that promotes anything fraudulent or unethical.
For ad rates, click here.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
bootstrap
bootstrap
3 years ago

Wait one second. If the “state” can “regulate social media-infringement on freedom of speech” … then the state can do so SELECTIVELY. Which means, the state can then regulate speech. SCAM ALERT.