Access Now stands for the right to freedom of expression and opinion. But increasingly, far-right political movements and other actors around the world are using claims of “free speech” as a rationale to incite violence against marginalized groups and communities and silence critics. We oppose this ongoing abuse and assault on our rights. Freedom of expression does not protect incitement to hatred, violence, and hostility against others, online or offline. Yet Big Tech companies are enabling the far right, aligning themselves more closely and openly with these movements, in what appears to be a bid to consolidate their own power and influence.
In January 2025, Meta announced alarming changes to its content moderation approach. Meanwhile, we have heard allegations that X’s algorithms are boosting far-right voices in France. People are already experiencing the dangerous real-world consequences of corporate policy changes that threaten their rights and safety. In the context of rising violence against refugees and the suppression of marginalized voices both online and offline, content moderation changes that do not protect human rights will only fuel further abuse and attacks against marginalized groups, exacerbate political tensions and polarization, and intensify cycles of violence and conflict.
Big Tech is leveraging the decline of democratic order to resist any meaningful efforts to hold them accountable for well-documented human rights abuses. Autocratic regimes seeking complete control of both public and private spheres have a track record of launching blunt attacks on civic space, such as banning funding or implementing restrictive laws in order to curtail civil society’s work. Unfortunately, we increasingly see democratic regimes using the same tactics. This has contributed to a dangerous status quo that has gone unaddressed for too long. Societies have become dependent on Big Tech even as people are increasingly targeted for exploitation and political manipulation, and the world falls prey to democratic backsliding.
In line with our core mission of defending people and communities at risk, Access Now is calling for a civil society movement to reclaim and protect the core meaning of the right to freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is a fundamental right, not a free pass to incite discriminatory attacks and silence those you disagree with. Neither politicians nor tech companies should be using false claims of “free speech” to advance their agendas. It is indispensable for human dignity and fulfillment, constituting a cornerstone of democracy, the rule of law, and inclusive participation in public discourse.
Given the escalating use of free speech claims as a shield for inciting hatred and violence, it is more urgent than ever to reaffirm what freedom of expression truly stands for. These are the principles we champion.
1. Everyone has an equal right to exercise their freedom of expression and opinion.
The rights to freedom of expression and opinion must be enjoyed equally. Any discriminatory barriers to exercising these or other fundamental rights violate international human rights law. When Big Tech companies adopt policies that cater specifically to far-right extremist ideologies, including amplifying or promoting anti-immigration, racialized, or gendered perspectives, it can have far-reaching negative implications for marginalized communities, such as migrants and racialized people, girls, women, transgender, and non-binary people — those already at risk. Silencing these groups online and effectively excluding them from public discourse violates their rights.
2. No one should use claims of “free speech” to foster division and intolerance for political ends.
It has now become commonplace for public figures to leverage free speech claims to demonize communities at risk and undermine human rights protections, with a view to making political and electoral gains. This contributes to amplifying divisive and hateful narratives. The changes Big Tech companies are making to their content moderation policies go hand-in-hand with far-right political groups’ use of state-sponsored disinformation campaigns to target opponents, independent academics and researchers, and organizations defending communities at risk. However, policies that protect freedom of expression for all do not provide a safe harbor for incitement to violence, hostility, and discrimination.
3. Online space must foster democracy, enable civic participation and media diversity, and serve the public interest.
Freedom of expression guarantees the right to seek, receive, and impart accurate, reliable information. Access to information enables people to hold their leaders accountable and to make informed decisions; however, social media platforms, which have in some cases become a primary source of information for people due to shrinking resources and democratic space for independent media, increasingly threaten information integrity. Given that state-sponsored propaganda and disinformation create significant risks to democratic discourse, any measures that private actors implement to address these risks must focus on how platforms’ operations contribute to or create them, as well as on how to mitigate the risks adequately.
4. Freedom of expression and platform accountability reinforce each other.
Contrary to ill-founded claims that accountability frameworks stifle innovation or create unnecessary burdens for private companies, human rights-centric platform accountability models actually strengthen the right to freedom of expression and opinion. It is misleading and a misinterpretation of the right to freedom of expression to tell people that legitimate efforts to hold platforms accountable for rights violations will lead to censorship or that regulations designed to protect human rights are “a weapon of lawfare” against particular political views.
5. Decentralized, free, and open source social networks, as well as transparent crowd-sourced content moderation, may help uphold the right to freedom of expression.
People increasingly rely on online platforms to access information. However, the infrastructure underpinning these platforms is consolidated in the hands of a few corporations and ultra-wealthy individuals. This jeopardizes democratic resilience and undermines accountability by restricting the spaces available for meaningful and diverse debate, while “locking” people into accepting companies’ opaque and rights-violating terms and conditions.
Decentralized social networks give people choices, allowing them to control what content they see. However, they are not a silver bullet solution. Even as decentralized social networks emerge, Big Tech-owned platforms may continue dominating online public spaces and pose systemic risks, given their reach and resources, and how embedded they already are in our societies. Regulating these giants, including imposing obligations for transparency, data portability, and interoperability, is paramount for protecting people’s rights.