Tag: social media

California’s Vague ‘Hate Speech’ Bill Would Force Big Tech To Censor Mainstream Conservative Views

alifornia lawmakers are once again leading the charge — not toward progress, but toward repression. Their latest move, Senate Bill 771 (SB-771), is being packaged as a bold stand against “hate” on social media. In reality, it’s a direct assault on the free expression and constitutionally protected speech of ministries, minority groups, and faith-based organizations.

The bill would force Big Tech to remove content that could be interpreted as “harassment” or “intimidation” based on race, gender identity, sexual orientation, and more — or face financially devastating lawsuits.

If Gov. Gavin Newsom signs this bill into law as expected, it will become one of the most dangerous speech-restricting laws in the country. Cloaked in the language of civil rights, SB-771 is built to punish dissent from progressive orthodoxy.

The target is anyone who dares to speak publicly about values or perspectives that conflict with the state’s ever-expanding list of protected identities. In practice, this means community groups sharing discussions on traditional family structures, cultural views on gender roles, or advocacy for certain social issues may find themselves silenced — not by law enforcement, but by tech giants eager to avoid legal risk.

The bills says:

California law prohibits all persons and entities, including corporations, from engaging in, aiding, abetting, or conspiring to commit acts of violence, intimidation, or coercion based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, immigration status, or other protected characteristics.

 3273.73. (a) A social media platform that violates Section 51.7, 51.9, 52, or 52.1 through its algorithms that relay content to users or aids, abets, acts in concert, or conspires in a violation of any of those sections, or is a joint tortfeasor in a violation of any of those sections, shall, in addition to any other remedy, be liable to a prevailing plaintiff for a civil penalty for each violation sufficient to deter future violations but not to exceed the following:

(1) For an intentional, knowing, or willful violation, a civil penalty of up to one million dollars

(2) For a reckless violation, a civil penalty of up to five hundred thousand dollars.


This language may appear just, but its sweeping terms — “intimidation,” “coercion,” even “aiding” — are dangerously vague. In the hands of ideologically motivated actors, they can be weaponized to silence constitutionally protected discourse under the guise of enforcing civil rights.

That’s the chilling brilliance of SB-771: it outsources censorship to the private sector under threat of state-enforced financial ruin. The law doesn’t need to directly ban speech — it just makes the cost of hosting it too high for Big Tech to tolerate. This will especially impact small ministries, minority-led organizations, and faith-based nonprofits with limited legal or technical resources. For them, one flagged post — perhaps a cultural reference taken out of context — could mean being shadow-banned or deplatformed altogether.

Keep reading

Tunisian Man Sentenced to Death for Facebook Posts Critical of President Kais Saied

A Tunisian court has handed down a death sentence to a man accused of posting critical remarks about President Kais Saied on Facebook, a decision that has sent shockwaves through the country’s already tense political climate.

Lawyer Oussama Bouthalja confirmed that 56-year-old day laborer Saber Chouchane was convicted over social media posts that mocked and denounced the president.

“The judge in the Nabeul court sentenced the man to death over Facebook posts. It is a shocking and unprecedented ruling,” Bouthalja said, describing the decision as both extraordinary and alarming.

Chouchane, who has little formal education, was arrested last year after running a Facebook page titled “Kaïs le misérable” (“Kaïs the Miserable”), a name openly deriding President Saied.

Reuters reported his online activity included satirical cartoons, posts urging protests, and messages that prosecutors described as attempts to “overthrow the state.”

Authorities accused him of spreading “false news” and “insulting the president,” charges that rights advocates argue are being used to silence dissent.

An appeal has been filed, according to Bouthalja, but Tunisia’s justice ministry has not commented on the case.

Although courts in Tunisia sometimes issue death sentences, no executions have been carried out for over 30 years.

Family members expressed disbelief and anguish following the ruling. “We can’t believe it,” said Jamal Chouchane, Saber’s brother. “We are a family suffering from poverty, and now oppression and injustice have been added to poverty.”

The verdict ignited a wave of outrage online, as Tunisians flooded social media with messages of disbelief and defiance.

Many see the ruling as a blatant attempt to intimidate government opponents and restrict free expression even further.

Opposition figures have been jailed on a range of charges, while rights organizations, including the Tunisian League for Human Rights and the CRLDHT, warn that the justice system is being weaponized to punish dissent.

The absence of transparency surrounding Chouchane’s posts has also drawn attention. Authorities have not released screenshots or transcripts, a move many view as an attempt to suppress the very content that challenged the government.

For Tunisians who once celebrated the country’s post-revolution commitment to free speech, this is a chilling new chapter.

Keep reading

Signal Threatens to Exit Europe Over EU Push for Messaging App Scanning Law

Signal is warning it will walk away from Europe rather than participate in what privacy defenders describe as one of the most dangerous surveillance schemes ever proposed by the EU.

Lawmakers in Brussels are pressing for a law that would compel messaging apps to break their own security by installing scanning systems inside private communications.

Meredith Whittaker, president of Signal, said the company will never compromise on encryption to satisfy government demands.

“Unfortunately, if we were given the choice of either undermining the integrity of our encryption and our data protection guarantees or leaving Europe, we would make the decision to leave the market,” she told the dpa news agency.

The draft legislation is framed as a child protection measure, but would require all major messengers, from WhatsApp to Signal to Telegram, to monitor every message before it is encrypted.

This would eliminate true private communication in Europe and create tools that could be abused for mass surveillance.

Privacy advocates have repeatedly warned that once a backdoor exists, there is no way to restrict who uses it or for what purpose.

Whittaker was clear about the stakes. “It guarantees the privacy of millions upon millions of people around the world, often in life-threatening situations as well.”

She added that Signal refuses to enable chat control because “it’s unfortunate that politicians continue to fall prey to a kind of magical thinking that assumes you can create a backdoor that only the good have access to.”

Any such system, she argued, would make everyone less safe.

The European Parliament already rejected the scanning mandate with a strong cross-party majority, recognizing the threat it poses to basic rights.

But within the Council of Member States, the push for chat control remains alive. Denmark’s presidency could renew momentum for the proposal, even though countries like Germany have so far resisted.

Germany’s position is pivotal. The coalition agreement of its current government promises to defend “the confidentiality of private communications and anonymity online.”

Yet the inclusion of the phrase “in principle” raises alarms, suggesting exceptions could open the door to backdoors in messaging apps.

If Germany wavers, Europe could be on the verge of losing secure communication altogether.

Keep reading

X Urges EU to Reject “Chat Control 2.0” Surveillance Law Threatening End-to-End Encryption

X is urging European governments to reject a major surveillance proposal that the company warns would strip EU citizens of core privacy rights.

In a public statement ahead of a key Council vote scheduled for October 14, the platform called on member states to “vigorously oppose measures to normalize surveillance of its citizens,” condemning the proposed regulation as a direct threat to end-to-end encryption and private communication.

The draft legislation, widely referred to as “Chat Control 2.0,” would require providers of messaging and cloud services to scan users’ content, including messages, photos, and links, for signs of child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

Central to the proposal is “client-side scanning” (CSS), a method that inspects content directly on a user’s device before it is encrypted.

X stated plainly that it cannot support any policy that would force the creation of “de facto backdoors for government snooping,” even as it reaffirmed its longstanding commitment to fighting child exploitation.

The company has invested heavily in detection and removal systems, but draws a clear line at measures that dismantle secure encryption for everyone.

Privacy experts, researchers, and technologists across Europe have echoed these warnings.

By mandating that scans occur before encryption is applied, the regulation would effectively neutralize end-to-end encryption, opening private conversations to potential access not only by providers but also by governments and malicious third parties.

The implications reach far beyond targeted investigations. Once CSS is implemented, any digital platform subject to the regulation would be forced to scrutinize every message and file sent by its users.

This approach could also override legal protections enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, specifically Articles 7 and 8, which safeguard privacy and the protection of personal data.

A coalition of scientists issued a public letter warning that detection tools of this kind are technically flawed and unreliable at scale.

High error rates could lead to false accusations against innocent users, while actual abuse material could evade detection.

Keep reading

New York Imposes Law Forcing Social Media to Justify Speech Policies to State Authorities

Social media companies operating in New York are now under fresh legal obligations as the state enforces the so-called “Stop Hiding Hate Act,” a new compelled speech law that forces platforms with annual revenues exceeding $100 million to hand over detailed reports on how they handle various forms of speech, including speech that is legally protected under the First Amendment.

The legislation went into effect on October 1 and has already triggered a constitutional showdown in court.

The law, officially Senate Bill S895B, demands biannual disclosures to the state Attorney General’s office.

These reports must outline how platforms define terms such as “hate speech,” “misinformation,” “harassment,” “disinformation,” and “extremism.”

Companies are also required to explain what moderation practices they apply to those categories and to provide specifics about actions taken against users and content.

Platforms that fail to comply face penalties of up to $15,000 per violation, per day. Injunctive action can also be taken against non-compliant entities.

Attorney General Letitia James declared that the law is about transparency and oversight.

“With violence and polarization on the rise, social media companies must ensure that their platforms don’t fuel hateful rhetoric and disinformation,” she said in a public statement, reinforcing her view that private companies should be accountable to the state for how they manage user expression.

“The Stop Hiding Hate Act requires social media companies to share their content moderation policies publicly and with my office to ensure that these companies are more transparent about how they are addressing harmful content on their platforms.”

Governor Kathy Hochul voiced similar sentiments, saying the legislation “builds on our efforts to improve safety online and marks an important step to increase transparency and accountability.”

Keep reading

TikTok censors posts about AIPAC’s influence after ownership change

TikTok has begun censoring posts that discuss the influence of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in the United States. This change follows a recent ownership transition to billionaires aligned with Israeli interests.

The decision to censor content related to AIPAC has raised concerns among users regarding freedom of expression on the platform. The specific nature of the posts being targeted has not been detailed, but the move has sparked discussions about the implications of ownership on social media content moderation.

This development comes amid ongoing political tensions and discussions surrounding AIPAC”s role in U.S. politics. Similar situations have been observed in other contexts, including recent developments in Madagascar, where protests have erupted over political issues, as reported in recent coverage.

No further information has been provided by TikTok regarding the criteria for censorship or the potential impact on user engagement. The situation continues to evolve as users and observers monitor the platform”s policies.

Keep reading

Discord Support Data Breach Exposes User IDs, Personal Data

A data breach affecting a third-party customer service provider used by Discord has exposed personal information from users who had contacted the platform’s support teams and among the data accessed were some images of government-issued IDs submitted by users.

The incident will amplify growing concerns around online ID verification, a practice increasingly mandated by governments as a way to enforce age restrictions online.

While Discord confirmed that the attacker did not breach its internal systems, the compromise of a vendor handling sensitive user data shows how collecting official identification, even in limited cases, creates serious and lasting privacy risks.

The compromised vendor had supported Discord’s Customer Support and Trust & Safety teams, and the attacker targeted it in an effort to extort money.

While the breach did not involve Discord’s internal systems, sensitive user data was exposed.

The company stated that the attacker accessed information from a “limited number of users” who had interacted with support staff.

Keep reading

Telegram Founder Pavel Durov Slams French Investigation, Warns of Global Crackdown on Privacy and Free Speech

Telegram CEO Pavel Durov made no attempt to hide his frustration with French authorities during a wide-ranging conversation on The Lex Fridman Podcast, describing the French government’s investigation into him and his company as “Kafkaesque,” “absurd,” and deeply damaging.

He warned that efforts to undermine digital privacy are accelerating not just in France, but across Europe and beyond, using pretexts like child protection and election integrity to justify surveillance and censorship.

Throughout the interview, Durov painted a grim picture of what he sees as growing authoritarianism disguised as public safety.

“Every dictator in the world justifies taking away your rights with very reasonable-sounding justifications,” he said, warning that citizens often don’t realize the gravity of their loss until it’s too late. “Every message they send is monitored. They can’t assemble. It’s over.”

Durov flatly rejected the idea that any government, including France’s, could force Telegram to grant access to users’ private conversations.

“Nothing,” he responded when asked if there was any scenario in which French intelligence could gain a backdoor.

He emphasized that Telegram does not and will not use personal data to power ad targeting, saying, “We would never use…your personal messaging data or your context data or your metadata or your activity data to target ads.”

Despite facing legal pressure and travel restrictions stemming from the French case, Durov said Telegram remains firm in its refusal to censor political content or violate users’ privacy.

“The more pressure I get, the more resilient and defiant I become,” he said, accusing French authorities of trying to “humiliate” him and millions of Telegram users through coercive tactics.

Durov described encounters with French intelligence officials who allegedly tried to pressure him into shutting down Telegram channels during elections in Romania and Moldova, actions he said would have amounted to “political censorship.”

He recounted being approached while detained in France and asked to disable channels that criticized preferred candidates of Western-aligned governments. “If you think that, because I’m stuck here, you can tell me what to do, you are very wrong,” Durov said he told one official.

He made it clear that Telegram had only taken down content in Moldova that actually violated platform rules, refusing broader demands that lacked justification.

Keep reading

MTG Demands Israel-Linked Influencers Register as Foreign Agents Amid $7,000 Per Post Scandal

The “Esther Project,” as detailed in Cleveland-Stout’s investigation, was coordinated through US-based PR firm Bridge Partners and managed in cooperation with Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

It reportedly allocated more than half a million dollars for influencer payments between June and September 2025, all with the goal of quietly shaping American public opinion and policy using paid social content—without transparent disclosure of foreign sponsorship.

Cleveland-Stout reports:

“In a meeting dedicated to harnessing pro-Israel media energy on Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu alluded to a cohort of Israel’s influencers. ‘We have to fight back. How do we fight back? Our influencers. I think you should also talk to them if you have a chance, to that community, they are very important.’
Being paid by Israel to post on social media is also very lucrative. According to previously unreported recent documents, these influencers are likely being paid around $7,000 per post on social media such as TikTok and Instagram on behalf of Israel.”

Citing the legal backbone behind her demand, MTG quoted the Foreign Agents Registration Act:

“Foreign governments routinely engage in efforts to influence our domestic and foreign policies, legislation, democratic processes, and public opinion. These governments sometimes exert this influence by employing lobbyists, public relations professionals, prominent businesspeople, or former U.S. government officials on their behalf. Such efforts are legal—if they are transparent. Originally enacted in 1938, the Foreign Agents Registration Act—known as FARA—helps the American people and their elected officials understand who is really behind such influence activity. The statute requires persons working on behalf of foreign governments or other foreign principals (including Americans) to disclose their relationships to foreign principals and information about their activities. Agents who fail to register are violating federal law, and they can be prosecuted if their failure is deliberate.”

Greene emphasized that her position is not directed at any particular group, but is strictly about legal compliance and transparency for foreign-influenced political messaging in the United States.

Keep reading

OpenAI Readies TikTok-Style App Powered Only By AI Videos

OpenAI is preparing a standalone social app powered by its Sora 2 video model, according to Wired. The app “closely resembles” TikTok with a vertical video feed and swipe-to-scroll, but only features AI-generated clips — users can’t upload from their camera roll.

Wired reported that Sora 2 will generate clips of 10 seconds or less inside the app, though limits outside the app are unclear. TikTok, which started with a 15-second cap, now allows 10-minute uploads. The app will also offer identity verification, letting Sora 2 use a person’s likeness in generated videos. Others can tag or remix that likeness, but OpenAI will notify users whenever it’s used — even if the video isn’t posted.

Wired adds the software will refuse some videos due to copyright, but protections may be weak. The Wall Street Journal reports rights holders must opt out to keep their content from appearing in Sora 2’s outputs.

Keep reading