either the websites are conduits for the speech of others and they may be regulated consistent with longstanding regulations on similar entities like cable companies OR
the speech on their site is their own, and they lose the Section 230 protections that immunize them from liability.
Section 230 was put in place in the 90's to protect a website from being sued into oblivion because some random posted kiddie porn and they didn't see and remove it. The law specifically said it was to protect a nascent industry so it could grow.
The landscape has changed; the internet isn't in danger of being wiped out through litigation, websites like Twitter and Facebook are billion dollar powerhouses, and they do an admirable job of purging their site of any contend that doesn't align with their views. Time for the training wheels to come off.
Section 230 is still protecting smaller sites that don't have money to pay full-time censors, though. I don't think it is the problem. I don't even think the problem is that operators of websites get to censor what they want. The problem is Big Tech engages in clear anticompetitive behavior, and no one does anything about it.
For example: eBay should not be able to own PayPal. Google should not be able to own YouTube. Apple should not be allowed to run the sole app store for Apple hardware.
Like so many things, you don't need a new law. you need the government to do its fucking job.
The tweet in the link presents a valid argument:
either the websites are conduits for the speech of others and they may be regulated consistent with longstanding regulations on similar entities like cable companies OR
the speech on their site is their own, and they lose the Section 230 protections that immunize them from liability.
Section 230 was put in place in the 90's to protect a website from being sued into oblivion because some random posted kiddie porn and they didn't see and remove it. The law specifically said it was to protect a nascent industry so it could grow.
The landscape has changed; the internet isn't in danger of being wiped out through litigation, websites like Twitter and Facebook are billion dollar powerhouses, and they do an admirable job of purging their site of any contend that doesn't align with their views. Time for the training wheels to come off.
Section 230 is still protecting smaller sites that don't have money to pay full-time censors, though. I don't think it is the problem. I don't even think the problem is that operators of websites get to censor what they want. The problem is Big Tech engages in clear anticompetitive behavior, and no one does anything about it.
For example: eBay should not be able to own PayPal. Google should not be able to own YouTube. Apple should not be allowed to run the sole app store for Apple hardware.
Like so many things, you don't need a new law. you need the government to do its fucking job.
Wrong on every level