Freedom of Speech Versus Algorithmic Moderation

Abstract

This article critically examines the tension between John Stuart Mill’s classical liberal defense of free speech and the intensifying influence of algorithmic content moderation on digital platforms. Algorithmic systems, which filter and control speech based on opaque principles and economic interests, increasingly shape political discourse. The article reflects how these practices contradict Mill’s harm principle by silencing dissent and opposing views in the name of public safety. It also critiques algorithmic moderation through the lens of political realism, exposing the disproportionate power exercised by corporations. Situated within Rawlsian distributive justice, the argument evaluates the normative implications for the least advantaged. Through case studies of content bans, shadow-banning, and misinformation regulation, the article argues that algorithmic moderation compromises democratic deliberation and freedom of expression. It calls for a context-sensitive approach anchored in transparency, accountability, and democratic governance.