Activists and lawmakers are pressing the Obama administration and social media companies to do more to fight the Islamic State’s use of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube as weapons of war. It’s an issue that’s raising questions over private companies’ responsibility to the public, along with the thorny issue of companies policing the speech of their users.
“We are losing a popularity contest to people that behead women,” a frustrated Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., remarked as the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday approved legislation designed to bolster efforts to drive terrorist supporters off social media platforms, many of which are U.S.-based, by requiring the Obama administration to work with companies on a strategy against them.
His frustration was shared by Republican Chairman Ed Royce, whose southern California district is near San Bernardino, where Islamic State supporters Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik attacked a holiday party on Dec. 2, killing 14.
Authorities believe the pair may have made contact with the Islamic State on social media.
“The Obama administration needs to get serious about targeting terrorists’ use of social media,” Royce said, referring to the attack. “Extremist groups are using Twitter, Facebook and YouTube across borders to recruit, radicalize and encourage attacks on our free society.”
The Islamic State’s mastery of social media is a big reason the number of foreigners joining its fight in Syria has grown from about 12,000 in June 2014 to between 27,000 and 31,000 today, according to a report released Tuesday by The Soufan Group, which noted that social media is the principal way the group recruits Americans.
“There are few places on earth in which the group’s message and imagery cannot be seen or heard, and its ubiquitous reach has led to the recruitment of individuals from Algeria to Uzbekistan,” the report said. “Yet, as hotbeds develop, recruitment through social media becomes less important than via direct human contact, as clusters of friends and neighbors persuade each other to travel separately or together to join the Islamic State.”
The legislation, sponsored by Ted Poe, R-Texas, is intended to prod the administration to do more against terrorists’ use of social media. But it’s also an initial step toward holding social media companies responsible for policing out terrorist supporters from their platforms.
Poe, a former judge, noted that a foreign terrorist organization such as the Islamic State “does not have a constitutional right under the First Amendment” to free speech.
Legislation introduced Wednesday in the Senate would go further, requiring tech companies to report suspected online terrorist activity to law enforcement, modeled on a similar requirement for child pornography.
“Congress needs to do everything we can to help intelligence and law enforcement agencies identify and prevent terrorist attacks, and this bill is a step in the right direction,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who co-sponsored the legislation with Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C.
Mark Wallace, CEO of the Counter-Extremism Project, a private nonprofit formed to fight online and financial support for terrorists, suggested that those who don’t cooperate could at some point be seen as offering material support for terrorist groups, which is illegal under U.S. law.
“At some point you’d have to be responsible,” Wallace, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, told the Washington Examiner.
Though civil libertarians have raised concerns about tech companies policing the speech of their users, and many conservatives in particular have complained of overly aggressive tactics against their views, Wallace said counterterrorism activists are seeking the same kind of efforts used against other illegal activities, such as child pornography or online harassment.
“We need to have the debate about what the appropriate limitations on this speech are,” he said.
