<p>FCC Chairman Ajit Pai says there should be more transparency in how sites like Facebook and Google restrict conservative content. ;</p>
<p>His comments come days before the FCC vote on whether to repeal &ldquo;net neutrality&rdquo; &#8211; a set of rules that currently forces Internet service providers (ISPs) to treat all web traffic equally.</p>
<p>Without net neutrality, your ISP could slow down a competitor&rsquo;s content or block political ideas it didn&rsquo;t like. This is already happening with content providers like Google, Facebook, and Twitter &ndash; all of which have been accused of restricting pro-Trump and conservative content. ;</p>
<p>&ldquo;A lot of famous people have very strong opinions about net neutrality,&rdquo; said<em> Fox News</em> host Tucker Carlson. &ldquo;They warn if it&rsquo;s repealed a handful of tech companies will have total control of the Internet. Wait, doesn&rsquo;t that already describe the status quo?&rdquo;</p>
<p>When asked what would prevent ISPs from censoring <em>Fox News</em> if net neutrality were to be dismantled, Pai told Carlson that such actions would require transparency and that the Federal Trade Commission would oversee content restriction. Pai&rsquo;s criticism of content providers included examples such as YouTube&rsquo;s crackdown on rightwing Internet personalities and Twitter&rsquo;s move to block a pro-life campaign video by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). ;</p>
<p>&ldquo;A lot of these decisions impinge on the free expression online that we&rsquo;ve all come to cherish. But there is no real transparency into how these decisions are being made,&rdquo; says Pai, adding that while Facebook, Google, and Twitter have &#8220;blocked content willy-nilly,&rdquo; ISPs have not. ;</p>
<p>&#8212;</p>
<p>An estimated 66% of American adults get their news through social media sites. As <em>The Hill&#8217;s</em> Anders Aslund points out, these sites are generally treated as &#8220;nothing but private conversation.&#8221; ;</p>
<p>Aslund blames the lack of regulation for allowing Russia&rsquo;s fake ads to appear on Facebook during last year&rsquo;s election. &ldquo;The social networks need to be regulated as other media are regulated,&#8221; writes Aslund. &#8220;Ordinary media would not allow such things to happen because they are regulated in numerous ways.&rdquo; ;</p>
<p>Facebook and Twitter&rsquo;s pathetic attempts to ;eliminate fake news prove they are not capable of pursuing self-regulation. Aslund believes future regulation should prohibit bots and anonymous accounts and prevent foreign citizens from placing ads on social media &ldquo;in the same way as they are not allowed to contribute campaign financing in the United States.&rdquo; ;</p>
<p>Social media platforms are no longer mere &ldquo;technology companies,&rdquo; writes Aslund. &ldquo;Their time of political innocence is over&rdquo; and &ldquo;they must take responsibility for their content,&rdquo; just like a newspaper or broadcaster. ;</p>