On Sunday’s CNN Reliable Sources with host Brian Stelter, Elon Musk’s buyout of Twitter was a hot topic.
The panel included journalist Molly Ball and unofficial Biden spokeswoman April Ryan. But it also included CNN media analyst David Zurawik, who proclaimed Musk’s ownership of Twitter as “dangerous.” He lamented the gatekeeper network of media elites losing its grip on information flows, saying, “You need regulation. You cannot let these guys control discourse in this country or we are headed to hell. We are there. Trump opened the gates of hell, and now they’re chasing us down.”
Sounds ominous! Zurawik continued, “There’s a bigger problem here about how we are going to control the channels of communication in this country.” He concluded, “I think we can look to the Western countries in Europe for how they are trying to limit it. You need controls on this.”
Here’s a question: What, exactly, does Zurawik mean when he says we should look to the guidance of European countries on how to regulate online speech?
First off, however, I must note that Zurawik is a spitting image of Judge Doom of Toon Town. He wants to drop unworthy Twitter accounts into a barrel of toxic waste. He has all the temperament of a panicked mole-rat scratching itself to death in the dark. Yes, it’s normally beneath a writer to comment on the demeanor or appearance of someone, but I do so in this case to illustrate a point. Under some European online speech laws, Zurawik could now pursue legal action against me and this publication for comparing him to a cartoony movie villain or hairless rodent. But it doesn’t stop there.
Take the former Finnish minister of the interior who was put on trial for hate speech. Paivi Rasanen’s offense? In 2019, she tweeted Bible verses against homosexuality. Finland’s state prosecutor said Rasanen made comments “likely to cause intolerance, contempt and hatred” toward gay and transgender people.
Advocates of such laws will claim that Rasanen’s defenders simply want to be able to bash gays and utter slurs. Of course, the same laws also allow for the prosecution of left-wing positions. The basic point is that European speech laws give government politicians and prosecutors dominion over what constitutes acceptable speech — even, that is, on matters of public import. This includes those social concerns involving religious liberty and faith. The consequence is a diminished and deterred freedom of speech across society.
So when Zurawik, who is not actually an incompetent mole-rat, advocates European speech controls, it is important to cite evidence of exactly what he means. Because he isn’t just talking about banning Nazis. When journalists sit silently and nod along as Stelter and others on the panel did, what are they tacitly endorsing?
Perhaps even the Department of Homeland Security’s new Disinformation Governance Board can launch some raids and prosecutions.
Stephen L. Miller has written for National Review, the New York Post, and Fox News and hosts the Versus Media podcast. He can be found on Twitter @redsteeze.
