I am torn over this Section 230. On the one hand, companies should have some freedom to operate as they see fit, similar to but not exactly like a person. At the same time, some of the execution of the big tech company policies seem to have a bias that paints an inaccurate picture. If you were in a phone call and said "I think Hunter Biden is a victim of sexual abuse when he was a child and is now a sexual predator" but the person on the other end didn't get to hear that cause the phone company deemed the remark as unfounded... would anyone be upset? What if the recipient of that conversation countered with "Well Trump raped 5 women and then paid them to keep quiet" but this time the phone company allowed that through? Both statements have no proof, but one was blocked and one was allowed.
S230 is fine for platforms that have absolutely nothing to do with content which isn't illegal. Once the begin editorally managing the content, they are a publisher and lose protection of S230.
I thought 230 protected the platform from being sued over false, misleading, hate and or bias speech posted by a user. If a platform has no bias, why do they feel the need to censor their content at all ?
no S230 for big tech. we need privacy laws that work. They have regularly censored or deleted content, therefore they are a publisher. we are done here. anyone remember AOL? something new will emerge if they cannot...
This comment may be in violation of our guidelines. You can still post it, but it will remain hidden until reviewed by one of our moderators.
This comment may be a reaction with little substance. It's at risk of being ranked lower than other comments.
Quality over quantity. You've hit our limit for comments posted. Please try again in an hour.