Adi Robertson

It’s rare I come across a truly novel social media moderation quandary these days, but I’ll admit this one’s new to me. (A little context.)

Today’s 2500-plus scheduled anti-Trump protest events — a followup to the ones that drew an estimated 4 to 6 million participants earlier this year — are underway, and if you’re looking for somewhere besides social media to follow along, States Newsroom has a liveblog of photos, crowd vibe-checks, and interviews from across the country.

It’s an expected consequence of the ongoing shutdown, which was already impacting the legal system. Federal judges are still going to serve and online case files will remain functional, but workers are being furloughed and some — though not all — civil cases involving the government are being delayed.

SB 2420 takes effect next year, but with app stores already complying, the First Amendment challenges are cropping up: one by trade group CCIA, another by a student advocacy group. California recently got its own app store verification law, so a legal showdown seems inevitable in America’s two most populous states.

Spitfire has a good check-in on the inevitable collision of hyper-documented influencers and hyper-realistic AI video:

A good story about digital navigators who received federal funds to help kids, seniors, and other people learn to use services like telehealth portals and classroom resources in rural Alabama — until their mission was deemed “woke.”

If you’re using one of 23 popular supplements, some cool and thorough investigative work at Consumer Reports can tell you the answer is probably yes — and explain why US health regulators aren’t doing anything about it.

The Verge has frequently quoted First Amendment experts from Columbia University’s Knight Institute, but Columbia hasn’t been doing great on the free speech front lately. This Guardian story is an interesting look at the tensions between the two organizations — and some reassurance the institute’s still worth trusting.