0.78% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
Resolution details
Company ticker
Lead filer
Resolution ask
Conduct due diligence, audit or risk/impact assessment
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Digital rights
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved: Shareholders request that the Board of Directors of Amazon conduct an evaluation and issue a report within the
next year, at reasonable cost and excluding proprietary information and disclosure of anything that would constitute an
admission of pending litigation, evaluating how it oversees risks related to denying or restricting service to users or customers
based on their viewpoint under “hate speech,” “misinformation,” and related policies, other terms of use or content
management policies, or any other policies or practices, and how such viewpoint discrimination impacts users, customers,
and other individuals’ exercise of their constitutionally protected civil rights.
Supporting statement
Filed by: The American Family Association, represented by Bowyer Research

Digital service providers (DSPs) control access to critical services and platforms that drive innovation in the American
economy and facilitate expression and the open exchange of information across the globe. These companies have
unprecedented power to censor speech. And they are under increasing pressure to remove unpopular religious and political
views from the marketplace.
Respecting fundamental freedoms, like free speech and religious liberty, drives healthy discourse and tolerance for diverse
views. Amazon, Inc. can and should promote these freedoms to best serve its diverse users and promote a healthy market and
marketplace of ideas. Economic growth also requires innovation, and that requires the freedom to challenge the status
quo. If DSPs build their own social credit system, they are going to lock out Americans from some of the best tools for
innovation and growth.
But recent events and DSPs’ own policies suggest that users’ and customers’ freedom of expression and religion are at risk—
including under Amazon’s watch. In addition to concerning revelations of collusion with government at companies like
Meta, Amazon, and Twitter to censor constitutionally protected speech,1 the 2023 edition of the Viewpoint Diversity Business
Index,2 in which Amazon scored 4%, notes that Amazon’s product policies impose viewpoint restrictions using vague
terms such as promoting “anti-social behavior”‘ and “question[ing] gender identity.” As noted by the 1792 Exchange’s 2023
report, these policies have led Amazon to remove products ranging from books questioning the predominant narrative
regarding transgender issues to pamphlets offering alternate perspectives on COVID-19.
When DSPs engage in this kind of discrimination, they expose themselves to heightened legal liability and hinder the ability
of Americans to access the marketplace. This undermines the fundamental freedoms of our country and is an affront to
the public trust.
Amazon also maintains that it promotes diversity and inclusion.3 The shareholders need to know that Amazon is adhering
to its own standards by serving diverse consumers without regard to their beliefs or other factors above.

Filed by The American Family Association.

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation name Declared voting intentions Rationale
THEMATICS Asset Management Against
Anima Sgr Against The company's current reporting and policies regarding the handling of controversial products and contents seem to provide sufficient information on proper and improper use of its service and when the company may restrict or remove products or content from its platform.

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.