March 8 The Politics of Free Speech

March 8 has long been a day for reflecting on progress toward equality. However, more than ever, it is also about the politics of free speech. On February 5, 2025, the U.S. Attorney General issued a memorandum in response to Executive Order 14173, signed by President Trump on January 21, 2025. The executive order declares that Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) initiatives violate federal civil rights laws and undermine national unity. Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the memorandum asserts that eliminating racial and gender-based preferences is essential for achieving equality.

To enforce this directive, the Department of Justice (DOJ) will investigate and penalize DEI and DEIA policies in private companies and educational institutions receiving federal funds. The Civil Rights Division and the Office of Legal Policy must submit a report by March 1, 2025, detailing enforcement strategies, including targeted investigations and potential legal actions. The memorandum also clarifies that institutions receiving federal funds may not implement race-based policies that disadvantage certain individuals, reinforcing a strict interpretation of civil rights law. The DOJ will collaborate with the Department of Education to issue guidance ensuring compliance, signaling a broad federal effort to curtail race- and gender-based DEI initiatives.

Erasing Language, Reframing Policy

As part of its broader ideological shift, the Trump administration has actively sought to redefine the language used in federal agencies. According to an investigation by The New York Times (Yourish et al., 2025), government agencies have flagged and, in some cases, removed a wide range of words from official communication, including diversity, equity, bias, oppression, climate crisis, mental health, and women. The changes are visible across multiple federal websites, where previously used terminology has been either replaced or deleted.

This shift reflects more than just a change in wording—it represents a deliberate effort to reframe how social, racial, and environmental issues are discussed at the federal level. As NYT documents, the administration has argued that many of these terms reinforce "woke ideology" and undermine national unity. The removal of terms like systemic discrimination or racial justice does not just alter official discourse; it actively reshapes the policy landscape by making it more difficult to acknowledge and address structural inequalities (Yourish et al., 2025).

This linguistic strategy mirrors historical patterns of discourse control, where governments have altered official terminology to shift public perception. By making certain words impermissible in official contexts, the administration is not only influencing government policies but also shaping how these issues are discussed in broader public debates. The question is not just which words are being removed, but what it means when the language available to describe injustice, inequality, and environmental challenges is being systematically narrowed.

 The Cyber-Libertarian Free Speech Renaissance

While the federal government is redefining language and limiting the scope of official discourse, major tech platforms are simultaneously reshaping their approach to speech, moderation, and visibility—whether in response to political pressure or shifting economic incentives. The rollback of DEI initiatives in the private sector is not limited to government intervention; it is also happening within some of the largest digital platforms that regulate online speech. Some of the most noticeable trends include:

- The removal of diversity-focused initiatives in hiring and content promotion, reducing formal commitments to workplace inclusion.

- A shift in platform policies that de-emphasize proactive content moderation, affecting how speech is regulated and whose voices are protected.

- A move toward a more libertarian interpretation of free speech, reinforcing the idea that reducing intervention ensures a more "neutral" digital space.

These shifts align with a broader cyber-libertarian vision of the internet—one that favors minimal intervention, market-driven governance, and a laissez-faire approach to online discourse.

Tech companies have long positioned themselves as neutral facilitators of speech, but their governance of free expression is shaped by legal and cultural traditions that differ significantly across regions. In the United States, platform governance is deeply rooted in a First and Fifth Amendment-inspired understanding of free speech, where protections are largely framed in relation to government intervention rather than the responsibilities of private actors. This reinforces the idea that limiting moderation and intervention is necessary to maintain a free and open marketplace of ideas.

In contrast, the European approach to free speech regulation is often shaped by principles of human dignity and protections against harmful speech, rather than a strict non-interference model. The Digital Services Act (DSA), for example, imposes legal obligations on platforms to mitigate harm and take a more active role in regulating content. The rollback of DEI in the U.S. plays into this deeper contrast, illustrating how cultural clashes over free speech emerge when these differing traditions collide in a globalized digital space.

 A Changing Understanding of Equality

While DEI has often been criticized as a superficial corporate response to structural inequalities, its rollback signals a clear shift: platforms are not just passive arenas for speech but active participants in structuring its conditions. This is not just about removing specific policies—it is about redefining the architecture of visibility in the digital public sphere.

As the next four years unfold, the critical question is not just how DEI policies evolve, but how digital platforms—through their moderation strategies, governance choices, and shifting commitments—will continue to shape public conversations on equality, voice, and representation.

While the shift is ideological, it has not stayed abstract—it has had tangible consequences for corporate policies across the tech industry. A growing number of major platforms and tech companies have actively dismantled their DEI commitments, signaling a broader transformation in how these firms approach diversity and inclusion. Based on the TechCrunch article "Here are all the tech companies rolling back DEI or still committed to it — so far" (2025), the largest social media platforms and tech giants, including Google, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, Tesla, and OpenAI, are among the companies that have either dismantled their DEI teams, removed references to diversity from public reports, or scaled back diversity initiatives in hiring and training.

 Companies Actively Rolling Back DEI:

- Google – Eliminated diversity hiring targets, considering stopping DEI reports.

- Meta – Disbanded DEI team, abolished representation goals.

- Amazon – Phasing out DEI programs, removing mentions of diversity.

- Microsoft – Disbanded DEI team in July 2024.

- Tesla – Removed all references to DEI from corporate filings.

- OpenAI – Changed "Commitment to Diversity" to "Building Dynamic Teams," erasing DEI references.

- IBM, Intel, Salesforce, Zoom – Reduced diversity-related targets and commitments.

 Companies Still Committed to DEI (to Some Extent):

- Apple – Rejected shareholder proposal to eliminate DEI.

- Nvidia – Still includes diversity initiatives.

- Oracle, Workday, JPMorgan, Delta, McKinsey, Costco – Have maintained some DEI policies despite pressure.

 Who Controls the Future of Speech?

The dismantling of DEI policies in both government and tech illustrates a larger shift in how speech is regulated and whose voices are elevated or diminished. While the government is erasing language and shifting enforcement priorities, tech platforms—under pressure from political and economic forces—are deciding the parameters of online visibility.

Ultimately, free speech in the digital age is not just about legal protections but about infrastructural control. The platforms that host, amplify, and curate conversations exercise immense influence over what is heard, seen, and silenced. As March 8 marks yet another moment to assess progress on equality, the battle over language, visibility, and representation will be fought not just in the courts, but in the algorithms and policies of the tech companies that govern the digital public sphere.

 Referencer

- Yourish, K., Daniel, A., Datar, S., White, I., & Gamio, L. (2025, March 7). “These Words Are Disappearing in the New Trump Administration.” The New York Times. 

TechCrunch. (2025, February). “Here are all the tech companies rolling back DEI or still committed to it — so far.”