These cases raise a critical question for the First Amendment and the future of social media: whether states can force the platforms to carry content they find hateful or objectionable.
(Image credit: Catie Dull)
Related Articles
-
AI is biased. The White House is working with hackers to try to fix that
The White House is concerned AI can perpetuate discrimination. It helped host a red-teaming challenge at the Def Con...
-
New proteins, better batteries: Scientists are using AI to speed up discoveries
New artificial intelligence tools are being rapidly developed across the sciences. They may not be able to solve every...
-
Elon Musk just became Twitter’s largest shareholder
The ultimate aim of Musk’s $2.9 billion share purchase is not clear. Yet in recent weeks Musk has questioned...
-
House GOP moves ahead with TikTok vote as Trump voices opposition to possible ban
House Republicans move ahead with a bill that would require Chinese company ByteDance to sell TikTok or face a...
-
Chinese companies offer to ‘resurrect’ deceased loved ones with AI avatars
Startups are catering to mourners who want a way to communicate with their lost loved ones — or at...
-
Traffic on Bluesky, an X competitor, is up 500% since the election. How will they handle the surge?
Unlike other social media sites, Bluesky allows users to create their own algorithm. The site does not have ads,...
-
The government announced winners of a contest to tell real voices from deepfake audio
Four organizations won a FTC contest for their tools that help tell real audio clips from deepfakes. The winners’...
-
Recent Comments