>"The Biden administration is telling Facebook which posts it regards as "problematic" so that Facebook can remove them. This is the union of corporate and state power -- one of the classic hallmarks of fascism -- that the people who spent 5 years babbling about fascism support." - Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald - Jul 15 - Twitter
>
>Jen Psaki - Biden White House @PressSec."We are in regular touch with the social media platforms about #COVID19-related misinformation. We're flagging problematic posts for Facebook."

If the WH is actually doing this, it's a prima facie First Amendment violation. It's Facebook's responsibility to moderate its content (if it chooses to do so). Being forced to do so by the state is another matter. Back-channel "moral suasion" is arguably more dangerous than open regulation.

"Problematic" is an example of increasingly popular newspeak. Translated it means "I don't like it, but I'm too lazy to explain why, and/or I'm afraid that if I do explain myself my biases and desire to abuse authority will be evident".

"Toxic" is very similar. "Toxic" means a large Twitter mob can be relied upon to denounce it (as far as any Twitter mob can be considered reliable); "problematic" commands a smaller mob. Anyone who uses the word "problematic" would prefer to use "toxic", and it's their earnest goal to promote anything they consider "problematic" to "toxic".

"Broken" refers primarily to institutions or processes. It means "It doesn't do what I want it to do" and like "problematic" and "toxic" its use indicates intellectual laziness, bias and desire to abuse authority.

These newspeak examples are just those that immediately jump to mind. Serious commentators avoid them. IMO anyone who uses them is suspect by default.