The problem is not Section 230, but how the courts interpret it. Courts have interpreted it to give social media companies immunity with how they manage their service, when the law says that only services that don't editorialize can do that. Twitter, FaceBook, and the like are clearly exercising editorial discretion on what they allow, which should mean Section 230 no longer applies.
This interpretation of Section 230 protects Twitter when it shouldn't, yes, but it also protects Gab, Rumble, Odysee, and all the smaller alt-tech sites.
The problem is not Section 230, but how the courts interpret it. Courts have interpreted it to give social media companies immunity with how they manage their service, when the law says that only services that don't editorialize can do that. Twitter, FaceBook, and the like are clearly exercising editorial discretion on what they allow, which should mean Section 230 no longer applies.
This interpretation of Section 230 protects Twitter when it shouldn't, yes, but it also protects Gab, Rumble, Odysee, and all the smaller alt-tech sites.
Underrated.