PHOENIX (AZFamily) — The Arizona Department of Education said it would uncensor social media accounts after an Arizona’s Family investigation found the department had blocked or muted about two dozen accounts belonging to activists and politically outspoken individuals.
Government censorship on social media is a still-evolving area of law that raises questions about the First Amendment and freedom of speech.
In March, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that public officials can sometimes be sued for blocking critics from the modern-day equivalent of the public square.
A spokesperson for Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne said all of the blocks were done by the previous administration.
“Our office is in the process of unblocking or unmuting accounts that were affected by the previous administration,” ADE spokesman Doug Nick said via email. “Every government agency has its critics, but those voices should not be stifled.”
Kathy Hoffman, Arizona’s previous state superintendent, declined to comment.
Public records obtained by Arizona’s Family showed the department’s official X account, @azedschools, blocked or muted 28 people.
That includes Amanda Wray, a parent in the Scottsdale Unified School District who became an outspoken critic of school closures and mask mandates during the pandemic.
Wray was featured at the time on Arizona’s Family and other news outlets after she successfully sued the Scottsdale Unified School District for its response to her activism.
“When a public official or government entity is blocking dissenters, it gives the impression of false unanimous support,” she said. “If you’re only hearing positive voices and on-lookers are looking at posts and comments and only [seeing those] in support, it makes those dissenters feel like they’re isolated.”
Arizona’s Family reviewed ADE’s blocked and muted accounts and found that 15 promoted conservative views or Republican candidates, eight promoted liberal views or Democratic candidates, and six could not be classified.
Steve Tully, an attorney who specializes in government litigation, said government accounts can put some restrictions on online speech.
However, those restrictions should be limited to the time, place and manner of that speech and should be “content neutral,” he said.
“The question is, when you block somebody, do they have a basis for blocking them that’s going to meet the constitutional requirements?” he said. “The burden is on the government. They have to prove that the blocking is legitimate.”
We found plenty of blocks by other public agencies, including seven blocks by the Phoenix Convention Center and 43 blocks by the Phoenix Public Library on X.
On Facebook, the official Phoenix Fire Department page blocked 18 people, and the official Sky Harbor page blocked 135.
“The City follows published Social Media Terms of Use in which the City reserves the right to block or hide any user account that repeatedly post comments that violate these terms of use or posts inappropriate or off-topic messages,” said Dan Wilson, director of communications for the City of Phoenix.
Wilson likened the social media policy to restrictions the city places on public meetings, such as City Council meetings. “For example, the City allows speakers a 2-minute time limit and comments must pertain to the current agenda item. Additionally there is an expectation for decorum among speakers in the meeting,” he said via email.
However, Wilson confirmed the city does not require its employees to keep a record of why they block someone.
Without such records, it may be difficult for the city to prove its blocks are constitutionally sound, Tully said.
The city’s policy was last updated in 2020, before two significant Supreme Court rulings on the topic.
The policy also declares that the city’s social media platforms are “not a public forum” – a declaration that may be more dubious in light of the Supreme Court’s findings.
In March, the U.S. Supreme Court issued decisions on a pair of cases out of California and Michigan that established when public officials can be held liable for blocking people on social media.
In the unanimous decision, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that public officials must have the authority to speak on behalf of their government and intend their posts to be regarded as coming from the government.
When those conditions are met, she wrote, they must allow criticism or risk a lawsuit.
Other cities, like Tempe, take a more cautious approach to online censorship.
Tempe spokeswoman Kris Baxter-Ging said the city strongly discourages departments from blocking accounts, with limited exceptions for automated bots.
Arizona’s Family requested records for 23 city-related social media accounts across Facebook, Instagram and X.
Across all those accounts, Tempe had blocked a total of three people.
All three appeared to be spam accounts.
See a spelling or grammatical error in our story? Please click here to report it.
Do you have a photo or video of a breaking news story? Send it to us here with a brief description.
Copyright 2024 KTVK/KPHO. All rights reserved.
Source link : http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=FexRss&aid=&tid=66b3573c931f4c658e62c19d61ec7088&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.azfamily.com%2F2024%2F08%2F07%2Farizona-dept-ed-stifled-political-voices-social-media%2F&c=17278177018772801837&mkt=en-us
Author :
Publish date : 2024-08-07 00:09:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
