Former President Barack Obama just floated one of the most dangerous ideas yet for controlling online speech — and most Americans haven’t even heard him say it.
In an interview with left-wing writer Heather Cox Richardson, Obama openly called for “new forms of journalism” — guided by “government regulatory constraints.” He argued that social media must be reshaped to “reaffirm facts” and “separate facts from opinion,” adding that this effort will require government involvement to determine what information is allowed to spread online.
Read that again. The man who once promised hope and change now wants Washington to decide which opinions count as facts.
Obama tried to soften it with a disclaimer about staying “consistent with the First Amendment.” But then he undercut that claim by calling for platforms to crack down on “hateful” and “polarizing” voices — vague terms that can be twisted to silence anyone who disagrees with those in power.
Cyber expert Mike Benz, a former Trump official, didn’t hold back: “His whole apparatus is set up to end the First Amendment. He’s coordinating with foreign governments to end free speech in America.”
The danger here is real. Once government decides what speech is “acceptable,” there’s no going back. In the U.K., broad online-speech laws already allow police to arrest people for “offensive messages” — many of them simple criticisms of immigration policy. That’s the model Obama is admiring.
It’s a dystopian loop we’ve seen before: create chaos, brand dissent as “hate,” then hand power to bureaucrats to decide what’s true.
Obama’s plan isn’t about protecting democracy. It’s about controlling it — one “regulated fact” at a time.
Don’t take our word for it — listen to Obama’s proposal yourself. Hear how easily censorship can be sold as “safety,” and decide if this is really the future America wants. Start at the 40:03 minute mark of the speech, but listen to the whole thing if you want to hear how much Barack Obama still hates GOP voters.