Election Information & Content Moderation
As distrust in election results continues to remain high, many legislators and election experts have looked to tech companies to confront misinformation spreading online. Each tech company oversees a unique digital environment with its own capabilities, vulnerabilities, and policies, making one-size-fits all prescriptions unsound. This panel discusses the role the tech sector and individual tech companies play in restoring public trust in elections.
Key Quotes:
“We need to recognize there are real consequences, both intended and unintended, of either decision of letting [Trump] back on [Facebook] or not... I currently think that he should be let back on, maybe with some restrictions, because I just don’t like the signal that it sends to the rest of the world that a United States company can silence a candidate for President of the United States.” - Katie Harbath
“One thing that we consistently see, even holding Trump aside, is that prominent accounts are treated differently than ordinary people... I think that our enforcement policies around public interest have actually been backwards for quite some time. Trump was only one example of that... We should be operating more under a moderation principle of ‘with great power comes great responsibility.’” - Renée DiResta
Speakers:
Renée DiResta – Technical Research Manager, Stanford Internet Observatory
Katie Harbath - Fellow, BPC’s Digital Democracy Project; Founder and CEO, Anchor Change
Rose Jackson - Director, Democracy & Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab
Naomi Nix - Tech Reporter, Washington Post