Gab take down shows a need for Internet Bill of Rights

Social media site Gab is the latest Internet platform to be taken down for being true to its mission as a home of free speech.

Authorities cited that Pittsburgh synagogue shooter, Robert Bowers, who killed 11 congregants on Saturday, used the platform to spew his anti-semetic rantings.

The service, which competes with Twitter, stated on its site:

Gab has spent the past 48 hours proudly working with the DOJ and FBI to bring justice to an alleged terrorist. Because of the data we provided, they now have plenty of evidence for their case.

While cooperating with law enforcement, Gab was shut down by its web-hosting company, Joyent, along with domain registrar GoDaddy. Also both PayPal and Stripe, which provide payment processing, cut off the site.

No matter what Gab did to help law enforcement, the platform was in the sights of Silicon Valley. Both Apple and Google blocked Gab from their app store late last year.

Despite all this weighing on the service, its users doubled over 2018 with over 6 million daily visits.

These actions show that there is a need for an Internet Bill of Rights.

Gab right now can’t say its First Amendment rights have been violated, because from all outward appearances the government did not shut it down. A corporation cannot violate a constitutional right of another company.

That’s not to say that the government did not put pressure on GoDaddy or PayPal to cut Gab off to essentially shut down the service.

This is not equitable to a publisher refusing to put out a book because of its subject matter, this is a printing plant refusing to print anything dealing with a particular subject.

And while there may be other printers who would publish the book, the Internet has very few alternative operators to replace the technology services provided by a GoDaddy or a PayPal on the scale needed.

It’s censorship of all for the actions of one. It’s too broad a ban violating too many people’s rights to let it stand.

3 thoughts on “Gab take down shows a need for Internet Bill of Rights

  1. The big “Not no but hell no”, is to let the social tech companies become “publishers”, with faux editorial rights etc. That’s what the establishment talking heads in UK are trying to spin.


  2. So what’s the solution? GAB was a cesspool of racism/hate, and talks of violence. You think people who believe in racism/hate/violence should have the right to a central communication platform, so they can potentially radicalize others, and amplify their own beliefs? Free speech is very important, but it is not without fault… and we shouldn’t ignore those very real faults. Not necessarily criticizing your post, I’m curious as to your position.


    • The solution is to stand up for free speech no matter how unsavory the topic. It’s too draconian to quell the right for all to speak their mind because some don’t care for the subject. The First Amendment is the envy of the world, and many would like to see it abolished both here and overseas.

      And as it stands now, private companies can curtail all speech without recourse. That really needs to change.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.