With Donald Trump in power, many different things have happened and many of them of dubious ethical taste. The latest has been the position of the former president with the extreme right reigning in the country. This led to certain social networks used by these groups being blocked by large technology companies such as Apple, Google, Amazon or Twitter. However, we find ourselves with the fine line that separates them from freedom of expression. Now US Senator Mike Lee of Utah and Colorado Congressman Ken Buck, they criticize the actions of Apple among others.
We will try explain everything that happened, putting it in context.
What is Parler and why did the big tech companies shut it down?
CEO of Parler
In January of this year, Google, Amazon and Apple vetoed Parler from their markets. The social network that has positioned itself as instrument for communicating the position of far-right parties and deniers. Parler did not start his career this year. He already has a long history of controversies that began in 2018 with John Matze and Jared Thomson. But it was at the beginning of this year when he consolidated his position, after the events that occurred in Congress.
Several people (followers of Trump and not wanting to give up power) decided to storm the US Congress, in one of the greatest attacks on democracy in the contemporary world. Twitter decided that it was time to veto those communications between the members who were proceeding with the assault. For this reason, most of the followers of the extreme right they decided to start using Parler.
It was not the first time that Trump supporters promoted the social network. In November 2020, and with the loss of the candidacy and the tweets eliminated due to fraud in the elections, the figures of Parler doubled reaching 10 million users in just a few days. It was confirmed, in this way, as the social network of conservatives and far-right voters. But it is that they were also joined by another belligerent group with the current situation: The deniers, who do not accept the hygienic-sanitary measures imposed by national and local authorities against COVID-19. What is usually said: They have joined hunger with the desire to eat.
Given the migration of users to the social network and since there were no security measures or control from the owners of Parler, Google announced the decision to veto the application in its store. Shortly after, Apple joined the claim with Amazon. Amazon had the key because they were using their servers, so Parles was completely disabled. The top of the pyramid of all this madness, was the massive hacking of the databases of the social network. 70TB of data has been leaked, including identity documents with names, addresses and contact details.
For all this it was closed, but now it seems that they did not do well.
A Senator and a Congressman pull Apple, Google and Amazon by the ears for Parler's shutdown
The us senator Mike Lee of Utah and Colorado Congressman Ken Buck they sent a joint letter to the CEOs of Apple, Google and Amazon for questioning the companies' actions in removing the Parler social network from their app stores and web hosting services earlier this year.
The timing of the actions taken against the Parler social network by its companies and that the actions appear to lack any of the procedural fairness normally offered in the event of an alleged breach of contract create the appearance of close coordination. These actions were cAgainst a company that is not alleged to have violated any law. In fact, information provided by Parler to the House Oversight Committee revealed that the House was assisting law enforcement even before January 6.
Amazon in its server storage division, stopped working with Parler because of his inability to moderate violent content. Parler was back online in February with the hosting provided by SkySilk and an alternate method of installation has now been provided to Android users. But not for Apple.
The dispute is served and the controversy too. In the letter sent by the politicians there are many questions that the companies involved must answer. Answers that will be analyzed by them and they will decide if the decision was finally made well or not. A question that although it does not end up being binding for Apple if it can bring some displeasure at the judicial level.