Parag Agrawal—Censor in Chief

Recently, the Ratcatcher has had a lot to say about the erosion of free speech in America. We have devoted three posts to that subject, chronicling the rapid decline in freedom of expression. Since the ultimate guardians of free speech in America are the American people, we believe it appropriate to highlight another egregious example of the tyrannical actions of the Left and of Twitter in particular.

Parag Agrawal is the CEO of Twitter, a corporation that, through its social platforms, controls the communications of millions of people. It is important to acknowledge at the outset that Twitter is not the government, either federal or state and, as such, is not subject to the First or Fourteenth Amendment strictures on free speech. Mr. Agrawal is well-aware that his company is not governed by the First Amendment. He is so aware that he took the time in 2020 to, figuratively, stick his finger in the eye of every American, announcing that “[O]ur role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation.”

Taken superficially, that statement might be deemed relatively harmless. But the statement begs the question of exactly what constitutes “healthy public conversation.” Traditionally in America, the role of the media [and Twitter is clearly media!!!] was to facilitate conversation; to allow for back-and-forth debate between disputing points of view. It is true, of course, that the media has largely abdicated its role, siding with the Left and attacking conservatives. Few platforms illustrate that better than Twitter.

Not content simply to announce the freedom of his organization from the First Amendment, Mr. Agrawal went further, and made plain that Twitter sees itself as a giant censor, empowered to regulate what is said and heard. Let us be clear: Mr. Agrawal did not claim the right to restrict what is said only what is heard. That is pure sophistry, a distinction without a difference. Here are his words, judge for yourself:

“. . . speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak, but our role, which is particularly emphasized, is who can be heard. [Emph added] Get that? Twitter gets to decide who hears what I say or write. How? By refusing to allow it to be posted to my Twitter account. Speech that cannot be heard is not speech! Does a tree make a sound when it falls if no one hears it?

Perhaps no better example of the invidious nature of Twitter’s censorship can be found than its act of banning the New York Post articles about the Hunter Biden laptop in the fall of 2020 [same year as Agrawal’s pronouncement]. The well-documented story was spiked by Twitter. Millions of people were denied access to it because Mr. Agrawal had decided that the story was not “healthy public conversation.” Seventeen percent of the voters who voted for Joe Biden later asserted that had they known of that story they would not have voted for him. There’s the proof of the Twitter motive in restricting free speech. Agrawal knew that if the story reached the millions of Twitter accounts, people would likely turn away from Joe Biden. He was right. So, Mr. Agrawal decided to sway the election by hiding the truth about Joe Biden’s family; after all, it was not “healthy public conversation.”

If it makes you sick to realize the influence of men like Agrawal, you can take action. Terminate your Twitter account and tell everyone you know to do the same. This tyranny is not going to end as long as Agrawal is in control. Shareholders of Twitter will throw him out if the company fails due to declining membership. Do you part – tell Agrawal what he can do with his censorship.

NOTE: If you have found this post interesting or helpful, please refer Ratcatcher.net to your friends. Ratcatcher invites you to leave a Comment or send an email to catcher@ratcatcher.net. Ratcatcher will respond to all civil emails.