Probably the same as some of today's politico's and law makers have in mind when it comes to curbing free speech, e.g. John Kerry's wish to be free from the limits the first amendment puts on government restricting speech [1]: our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence. So what we need is to win the ground, win the right to govern, by hopefully winning enough votes that you’re free to be able to implement change or supreme court justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson's mournful declaration that [the] First Amendment is ‘hamstringing’ government from censorship [2]
In other words, nothing has changed really in that those in power are wary of technology which allows non-government (controlled) entities to spread information.
Even the NY post at least (shockingly) had enough context to get to the further reasonable issue: we’re seeing mass disinformation, sometimes from foreign enemies, spread across the homeland at rates never before seen, and in doing its ripping apart the fabric of society. The way you’re being selective in these quotes is doing a disservice to the very real issue at hand. This is exactly a “new medium might be misused to spread foreign propaganda or divisive content.”
Nobody mentioned nor complimented the behavior of "her conservative peers." You're the one who has turned the discussion partisan.
The fact that "conservatives" are also bad on an issue doesn't make non-conservatives good or even different on an issue; that's from that weird pseudo-argument where people who passionately hate Trump mention that Trump also did some act or took some position that they're trying to defend.
It's become an argument that something is fine if the people who one claims are the evilest people in the world also think it is fine. Or that if evil people can get away with something evil, then that's unfair to the good people who have earned the opportunity to do evil? I have no idea.
Go look at where that KBJ quote (missing context and then being misinterpreted) is making the rounds: it’s from a very specific news bubble. That’s why I said “apparently in agreement with her conservative peers.” Both of those quotes were (to me) not made in good faith.
I don’t really know what you’re otherwise on about. I think you’re suggesting I’m making things far more partisan than I am. I’m just responding to the highly partisan selective quotes given.
[1] https://nypost.com/2024/10/02/opinion/john-kerry-says-first-...
[2] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/2926698/keta...
In other words, nothing has changed really in that those in power are wary of technology which allows non-government (controlled) entities to spread information.