**Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Testifies at House Hearing on Government Censorship**
**Republicans Amplify Claims of Bias by Technology Companies**
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a Democratic presidential candidate, defended himself against accusations of promoting racist and hateful online conspiracy theories during a House hearing on government censorship. Despite requests from outside groups to disinvite Kennedy following his recent antisemitic remarks, the Republican-led Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government allowed him to testify. At the heart of the hearing is the GOP claim that conservatives and others are being unfairly targeted by technology companies that collaborate with the government to combat the spread of disinformation online. While Democrats acknowledge the importance of free speech, they argue that it comes with the responsibility not to spread misinformation that may incite violence.
**Kennedy Invokes Family Legacy to Defend His Statements**
During his opening remarks, Kennedy invoked his famous family’s legacy to challenge accusations of racism and antisemitism. He passionately defended his statements on race, vaccine safety, and other issues, stating that they were not racist or antisemitic. Kennedy emphasized that his family has always believed in the right to free speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment. He asserted that the First Amendment was intended to protect speech that may not be well-received by everyone. Republicans, eager to elevate Kennedy’s profile after his announcement of a Democratic primary challenge to President Joe Biden, supported him. Dennis Kucinich, Kennedy’s presidential campaign chairman and a former congressman, sat behind him during the hearing.
**Tech Companies Deny Bias Allegations**
Technology companies, often referred to as Big Tech, have vehemently denied the allegations of bias made by Republicans. They maintain that they enforce their rules impartially, regardless of ideology or political affiliation. Furthermore, research has not provided significant evidence of systemic bias against conservative news, posts, or materials on social media platforms.
**Debate on Censorship Intensifies**
The top Democrat on the House panel, Del. Stacey Plaskett of the Virgin Islands, criticized the Republican majority for allowing Kennedy and others to promote conspiracy theories and bigotry during the hearing. She emphasized the danger of spreading misinformation, especially considering the interference of Russia and other adversaries in American elections. Plaskett warned that this interference is expected to continue in the 2024 election. The hearing became emotional and heated as subcommittee chairman Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, presented examples of what he claimed to be censorship. He cited a request from the White House to Twitter to remove a race-based post from Kennedy about COVID-19 vaccines. Jordan expressed his support for Kennedy’s presidential campaign as an effort to expose and combat censorship.
**Kennedy’s Controversial Statements**
A watchdog group requested that Jordan rescind the invitation to Kennedy due to his suggestion that COVID-19 might have been “ethnically targeted” to spare Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people. Kennedy denied ever suggesting that COVID-19 was deliberately engineered to spare Jewish individuals and criticized The New York Post for twisting his words. Despite his denial, a video clip containing his remarks was aired during the hearing. Moreover, Kennedy has a history of comparing vaccines to the Holocaust, comments for which he has occasionally apologized.
**Democrats Press for Consideration of Consequences**
Democrats implored Kennedy and Republicans to consider the consequences of their words and actions. They pointed out that one of the posts highlighted by Republicans as an example of biased censorship had not been removed by any censors. Democrats stressed that hate speech has severe consequences and referenced the mass shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue. The hearing was described as Orwellian by Rep. Gerry Connolly, while Rep. Sylvia Garcia revealed that she had received a death threat following a previous hearing of the Weaponization panel. When Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz criticized Kennedy’s posts and questioned his intentions, Kennedy interjected, accusing her of slander.
**Children’s Health Defense Lawsuit**
Kennedy’s organization, Children’s Health Defense, has filed a lawsuit against several news organizations, including The Associated Press. The lawsuit accuses the news organizations of violating antitrust laws by taking action to combat misinformation, particularly related to COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines.
**Section 230 and the Role of Technology Companies**
The panel’s objective is to investigate the relationship between the federal government and technology companies regarding the identification and handling of false information on their platforms. The discussion is influenced by Section 230 of federal communications law, which shields technology companies like Twitter and Facebook from liability for content posted by users. Lawmakers are also hearing testimony from other witnesses, including Emma-Jo Morris, a journalist at Breitbart News who focuses on reporting about Hunter Biden, and D. John Sauer, a former Solicitor General in Missouri who now serves as a special Assistant Attorney General involved in a lawsuit against the Biden administration.
**Importance of Fact-Based Platforms**
Maya Wiley, the president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, urged lawmakers to consider platforms that enable Americans to share views but stressed the importance of basing those views on facts rather than fiction. The U.S. has been cautious about regulating social media giants, despite concerns from external groups about the proliferation of hate speech and misinformation, which can damage civil society.
The Associated Press provides support from private foundations to enhance its coverage of elections and democracy. Learn more about AP’s democracy initiative on their website. The AP holds sole responsibility for all content produced.