Miguel Afonso Caetano<p>"Regulation that impedes the operation of US digital behemoths – anything short of blanket permission to do as they please – will apparently be treated as a hostile act and an affront to human liberty.</p><p>This is an imperial demand for market access cynically camouflaged in the language of universal rights. The equivalent trick is not available in other sectors of the economy. US farmers hate trade barriers that stop their products flooding European markets, but they don’t argue that their chlorine-washed chickens are being censored. (Not yet.)</p><p>That isn’t to say digital communications can be subject to toxicity tests just like agricultural exports. There is wide scope for reasonable disagreement on what counts as intolerable content, and how it should be controlled. The boundaries are not easily defined. But it is also beyond doubt that thresholds exist. There is no free-speech case for child sexual abuse images. The most liberal jurisdictions recognise that the state has a duty to proscribe some material even if there is a market for it.</p><p>The question of how online space should be policed is complex in principle and fiendishly difficult in practice, not least because the infrastructure we treat as a public arena is run by private commercial interests. Britain cannot let the terms of debate be dictated by a US administration that is locked in corrupting political intimacy with those interests.</p><p>It is impossible to separate the commercial and ideological strands of Trump’s relationship with Silicon Valley oligarchs. They used their power and wealth to boost his candidacy and they want payback from his incumbency. There is not much coherence to the doctrine. “Free” speech is the kind that amplifies the president’s personal prejudices. Correcting his lies with verifiable facts is censorship."</p><p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/16/trump-defending-free-speech-submission-usa-president" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://www.</span><span class="ellipsis">theguardian.com/commentisfree/</span><span class="invisible">2025/apr/16/trump-defending-free-speech-submission-usa-president</span></a></p><p><a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/USA" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>USA</span></a> <a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/Trump" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Trump</span></a> <a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/FreeSpeech" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>FreeSpeech</span></a> <a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/Censorship" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Censorship</span></a> <a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/Imperialism" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Imperialism</span></a> <a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/ContentModeration" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>ContentModeration</span></a> <a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/Ideology" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Ideology</span></a> <a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/BigTech" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>BigTech</span></a> <a href="https://tldr.nettime.org/tags/SiliconValley" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>SiliconValley</span></a></p>