"A recurrent theme during the past decade of American politics has been the repeated calls for censorship of "hate speech" or "misinformation" on the internet, mostly coming from the political left. One way that many believe they could circumvent the First Amendment and enforce censorship on the internet is through reform of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Worryingly, besides the usual Democratic suspects, some Republicans have started calling for Section 230 reform and internet censorship."
"While most Americans may not be familiar with Section 230, all benefit from it: It is responsible for much of our ability to speak freely online. Without it, it is hard to see how social media would have taken off in the first place. At its core, Section 230 simply prevents computer service providers, including social media companies, from being treated as publishers by law, meaning that they do not have civil liability for user-generated content on their platforms."
Calls to censor 'hate speech' and 'misinformation' online have intensified over the past decade, with many targeting Section 230 as a means to enable government or private censorship. Section 230 prevents online service providers from being treated as publishers, limiting civil liability for user-generated content and protecting platforms from constant lawsuits. The statute treats platforms as distributors, with liability only for human trafficking, intellectual property, and criminal materials. Section 230 has been central to the growth of social media and broad online expression. Repealing or weakening Section 230 would likely chill speech, invite litigation, and hinder startups and online platforms.
Read at The American Conservative
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]