Dick Blumenthal Would Be Better Off Confusing Section 230 With A Finsta

Big Tech continues to roll through our civil liberties and first amendment rights while Democrats accuse them of promoting child abuse. 

Section 230 is the main threat to the Big Tech oligopoly. Everyone on Capitol Hill knows what they fear. And no one is going to stop it because the technological elites are bidding on their liberal governmental paymasters acting as private censors. Big Tech is running a massive thought suppression and psychological operation on the American people. 

That is why we are entertained by dopey Democrat Representatives who do not know the first thing about technology lecture executives about fake accounts. 

Maybe Democrat Senator Dick Blumenthal (CT) should talk to Pierre Delecto about Finsta?

Finsta stands for Fake-Instagram account. It is a slang term for an Instagram account that allows teens and adults to join restricted groups. Often social media platforms have age restrictions that are easily bypassed by simply entering a fake birthday. 

Blumenthal provided a humiliating example of the clueless people in Congress right now. In hearings with Facebook and questioning Antigone Davis, Global Head of Safety, he blundered a simple question about fake accounts. Davis testified on Thursday at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing. 

As an executive charged with safety and security, she must have understood what he was asking. But she did a great job looking befuddled when Blumenthal asked about forbidding ‘finsta’ accounts. 

The Senator was derided online for his attempts to end “finsta” accounts, which are a function of open email-based registration. 

Blumenthal wanted Facebook, which owns Instagram, to focus on stopping people from creating finsta accounts. But he thought that this was a program used by Facebook to entice children into using the platform. Blumenthal demanded, “Will you commit to ending finsta?” 

It is the modern equivalent of “Did you order a code red?” 

Davis needed to think about this question and answered, “let me clarify, we don’t really, we don’t do finsta.” Blumenthal thought he was onto something here. He knew, like the bloodhound prosecutor he is, she was hiding something. His radar lit up. 

When Davis attempted to explain her way out of this pickle, Blumenthal was not impressed. She explained that ‘finsta’ alludes to kids setting up accounts their parents disapprove of. It would be nice if parents had a connection with adolescents and built relationships with teenagers instead of letting them run wild online. David stated that she found kids sometimes like interacting with a smaller secret group of friends. 

Blumenthal pounced, “Finsta is one of your products or services. We’re not talking about Google or Apple. It’s Facebook, correct?” 

Davis explained that Finsta is slang. Blumenthal pressed her to end the use of slang or stop the misuse of online services. Or maybe he wants her to shut down Instagram. He seemed confused at this point. 

Davis’ solution was to describe how Instagram offers “additional privacy options to address those kinds of issues where they want more privacy.” Blumenthal was not impressed. 

We are left to assume that he intended to end or reduce anonymous accounts. But he could care less whether Facebook bans the President of the United States from the platform or vacillates between definitions of what is or is not scientific. Instead, these companies can take advantage of the grey status they enjoy as part of the Section 230 protection, oscillating between claims of being platforms or publishers when it suits them.