Nationally syndicated radio talk show host of “The Mark Levin Show,” host of Fox News Channel’s “Life, Liberty & Levin,” bestselling author of “Unfreedom of the Press” and American lawyer joined Editor-in-Chief of The Daily Wire and host of “The Ben Shapiro Show” for “Sunday Special Ep. 56” last Sunday, Levin suggesting government ought not protect social media; instead, let the free market take its course.
“I think that the free market should take its course, but it’s not,” stated Mark Levin on “The Ben Shapiro Show Sunday Special Ep. 56.” “The government protects these sites. So, the government ought to remove the protection, and now they’re really in the free market. Let’s see how they handle themselves. Whether it’s litigation, whether it’s public opinion, whatever it is, YouTube won’t survive doing what it’s doing. It’s not going to survive doing what it’s doing. It ought not be protected in any way.”
Below is a transcript, in pertinent part, of Mark Levin’s remarks with Ben Shapiro on “Sunday Special Ep. 56”:
Ben Shapiro: “What do you think ought to be done with some of these social media companies? There’s a really interesting and sort of rich debate now happening inside the conservative movement about Facebook and YouTube and Twitter particularly, a lot of folks saying, ‘These are monopolies, and they ought to be broken up.’ Some people suggesting that the government ought to come in and regulate them. I’ve made the argument in the past that either they’re a platform or they’re a publisher. They don’t get to act like Vox.com and then be treated as though they’re an AT&T phone line.
“Do you think that the government has any role here, or will the free market, should we just let the free market takes its course, which is an argument I’m certainly open to?”
Mark Levin: “I think that the free market should take its course, but it’s not. The government protects these sites. So, the government ought to remove the protection, and now they’re really in the free market. Let’s see how they handle themselves. Whether it’s litigation, whether it’s public opinion, whatever it is, YouTube won’t survive doing what it’s doing. It’s not going to survive doing what it’s doing. It ought not be protected in any way.
“I feel the same way with the press, since 1964, the Sullivan case. You know, we had a free, a very free robust press before the Supreme Court jumped in, and even when we had the First Amendment originally, you still had state libel laws and so forth. You could still be sued under state libel laws. So there’s no check whatsoever – not on a free press – but on absolute outrageous comments. That’s fine.
“So, let that system play out. Let our legal system play out. I don’t think these entities should be protected by federal law in any respect. Let them be out there with the rest of us, and deal with the rest of the issues, and figure out their business model that way.
“The government’s going to step in and do what, exactly? Who’s going to step in and do it? I get very nervous when Congress steps in. It’s filled with knuckleheads who do not respect the Constitution. You can see them today. You’ve had a number of administrations that have wanted to kill talk radio. You’ve had presidents, like Obama, that wanted to kill Fox. You’ve had this nonsense about net neutrality. Those are the people who are now going to manage? I don’t think that’s any better.
“The market works. No protections, and let them die or live.”