The powerful resistance tool is already in your hands

In an eyewitness video analyzed Frame by frame New York TimesAlex Pretty raises one hand and holds the phone in the other. Federal agents deal with him, and one of them apparently finds and removes a gun that was strapped to his hip. The agent then shoots, followed by another agent. They apparently fired nine more shots while Preeti was lying on the ground.

The Trump administration claimed that Pretty was shot because of his gun, which he was legally carrying, and that agents, To be determined later In the records he saw ProPublica As Border Patrol Agent Jesus Ochoa and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Officer Raymundo Gutierrez acted in self-defense. But the tool he was clearly holding in the seconds before he was killed is the tool the Trump administration seems truly afraid of — and the tool it has fought so hard to control.

The phone Pretty was carrying — like the one onlookers used to record his killing and share it with the world — had the kind of power that the Trump administration has repeatedly acknowledged as both a threat and a tool, depending on who was using it.

The image of Preeti holding his phone moments before his death is emblematic of millions across the country who cling to digital evidence and online forums to understand the events taking place across the country. For those who oppose the federal government’s immigration enforcement tactics, technology — especially in the form of phones and social media — has become one of the most powerful defenses, whether used to alert others to the presence of ICE, organize procedures and assistance, or help those far away see what is happening on the ground. For the Trump administration, it is an obvious thorn in its side.

Management recognizes the power of information technology and uses it. Official government accounts regularly share right-wing memes with authoritarianism and Talking points about white supremacywhile Cabinet secretaries and President Donald Trump quickly jump to X and Truth Social to relay their version of events. Shortly before Pretty was killed, the department used social media to counter video evidence of another killing on the streets of Minneapolis by a federal agent: that of 37-year-old Rene Judd. In a Truth is a social functionTrump claimed that Judd “brutally ran over an ICE officer” and pointed at him One endearing and distant corner Of the incident he said it was “hard to believe” that the client was alive. A times analysis From several angles of the shooting — including those that were much closer to the incident — she found that “the agent was not in the path of the victim’s SUV when he fired three shots at close range.”

Officials in each administration dismissed or downplayed negative press reports. Conservatives often point out that the Biden administration has recognized the immense power of information amplification via social media platforms, with administration officials urging the platforms to remove medical misinformation or limit its spread during the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, the Trump administration has proven particularly willing to ignore obvious truth and particularly savvy in using technology to shape its narrative of history. that it He was accepted by influencers They realize that they can be as effective, if not more, as traditional media in disseminating messages on a large scale. that it Rapid response memeification He speaks the language of the Internet fluently. They ally themselves with or create platforms that facilitate the flow of information.

Trump learned an important lesson after his first term about how important it is to control the very platforms where narratives spread. In 2020, a bystander video of Derek Chauvin, a white police officer, kneeling on the neck of a black man named George Floyd for nine minutes sparked protests in cities across the country, and led to tangible protests — if mostly It didn’t last long – It changes. Trump said Americans were “rightfully disgusted and revolted” by Floyd’s “brutal death,” but they also blamed Antifa and “professional anarchists” for provoking his pledge to deploy more law enforcement to contain the demonstrations.

He also holds a more personal grudge. In 2021, it was Trump I set off Facebook, Twitter and YouTube over concerns that he incites more violence after the insurrection at the US Capitol. A year later, He launched his own social platformSocial truth. By the time he was elected to a second term, Elon Musk, a Trump supporter who briefly joined the administration, owned X, which had recently been renamed Twitter. Instead of banning TikTok when required by law last year, Trump Claimed deadline extension Forced sale until ByteDance I finally came to an agreement With some of his closest allies.

A big part of the stated reason is lawmakers from both parties Vote to force the sale of TikTok This was because they feared a hostile government could control the narratives that would eventually reach American users. Some have already blamed the app Creating a generational wedge In Americans’ view of Israel. It’s no surprise that in an era when technology platforms are mostly left to their own devices to determine what voices can and cannot be heard, policymakers will be concerned about what messages can get through them — and realize the unparalleled potential of having those pipes. Before Musk bought Twitter, he waxed poetic about being a person Absolute freedom of expressionand then almost immediately Withdrawn journalists Who indicated general information about the whereabouts of his private plane. Musk’s actions show what has long been true of social media platforms: private companies are not really a public arena, yet they continue to shape the messages that reach our reality.

That’s why the administration has also acted quickly to confront, and sometimes suppress, narratives spread online by dissidents. After the killing of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk by a gunman at a university in Utah, Some conservative lawmakers Activists have pressured employers and platforms to take action against people who posted critical comments about Kirk and US Attorney General Pam Bondi. She pledged to target those who use “hate speech.” before clarification “Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is not protected by the First Amendment.” Reuters Found Hundreds of people faced consequences from their employers for their comments related to Kirk’s killing – while some celebrated or mocked his death, others simply reprinted Kirk’s words or criticized his political positions.

In several cases, administration officials have looked directly at platforms that amplify opposition messages. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr Broadcasters are threatened Which aired comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s show after he made a joke about conservatives’ reaction to Kirk’s death. More recently, amid a backlash in more liberal cities against ICE, FBI Director Kash Patel promised that Investigation of signal combinations Where users share information about the movements of immigration agents. After criticism from the administration… Both Apple and Google have removed the apps Which allows users to report ICE sightings in public places.

As private sector companies, technology platforms have no legal obligation to ensure that these types of applications or user posts remain available, but the First Amendment and Article 230 Protect their choice to leave or remove third party content in either case. While Section 230 has become a common target for critics of Big Tech, Supporters of the law warn Breaking them up could incentivize platforms to limit expression that they deem to be risky and that could invite legal liability.

The first Trump administration recognized the power of technology as well. The president was known to be a forceful user of what was then called Twitter. But at the time, his cabinet included more officials willing to roll back most norm-violating actions, and the president often faced more checks on his power. Today, Republicans control both chambers of Congress, and many remaining lawmakers have tied their political fates to Trump. This has created an environment in which threats against freedom of expression can be more worrying than before.

However, in today’s social media landscape, an event like Preeti’s death can still shock people all over the internet and stir up some emotions. Improbable online communities To talk. Shortly after the shooting, when the Secretary of Homeland Security visited Kristi Noem claimed Preity was “brandishing” a weapon with the aim of causing “maximum damage”, and many had already seen the videos themselves. They chose to believe their eyes instead.

After Preity was killed and the first video spread across social media, people were quick to look for other angles. The protesters who stood in the frigid streets of Minneapolis, holding their phones and pressing the record button, will play an important role, armed with the First Amendment and one of the most powerful tools to exercise it.

Preeti’s phone did not protect him on the day he died. But those who took photos of his killing by federal agents helped the world see what was happening in Minneapolis, and kept many of their own from turning away. For an administration that has tried so hard to control the narrative, this poses a threat as serious as any.