No. of Recommendations: 4
There is a distinction to be made between government intervention to prevent the trafficking of an already illegal physical substance (in this example kiddie porn) and government intervention to prevent the trafficking of contrary opinions (for example government claims about the effectiveness of masks).Not a legally relevant one. Government probably can't censor discussions about kiddie porn that are not themselves unlawful. In fact, under
Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, I'm pretty sure they can't:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Spe...The nature of the "intervention" is the same. You have an online discussion about something that
both the government and the hosting site would prefer not take place on the site. But the discussion is itself protected speech, so the government can't directly prohibit it. But since the hosting site has policies that it has voluntarily chosen to adopt (goes the argument), government
can take action to help the hosting site do what it already wants to do - more effectively prohibit the conversation for hosting site's own purposes.