4mo ago

Lawmakers are trying to repeal Section 230 again

www.theverge.com

Summary

Lawmakers are once again pushing to repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields online platforms from legal liability for user-generated content.

Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) are collaborating on a bipartisan bill to sunset the law in two years.

Repealing Section 230 aims to force Congress to renegotiate platform liability standards.

The proposal reflects growing frustration over tech giants’ power and content moderation practices, but past efforts have faced political gridlock despite bipartisan support.

33 comments

For all the people cheering or indifferent to this:
This would affect more than social media - this would affect ANYWHERE that has user accounts that can post content - blogs, wikis, website builders, hell, even email.
The summary states this is so it can be "renegotiated". Considering the current authoritarian direction of the United States, now would be absolutely the worst time to rewrite online content policing laws - it will absolutely be used to silence dissent.
- Sounds like talking points of someone paid off by social media to sow division about the bill.
  I don’t see why it’s an issue that this would apply to moderation of all user generated content on very large online platforms. That’s the point. The platforms are pushing false and controversial content to drive engagement and have not implemented the necessary guardrails to verify correctness and minimize harm (like, when a post/blog is inciting violence).
  That’s a definite possibility in the current regime that the bill will be used to silence dissent. But from what it looks, the White House doesn’t need bills to silence dissent. Everything in the country is being done by and fought between the executive and the judiciary with 0 public involvement. At least with a bill, there are >500 people involved in passing/blocking it so a larger surface for people to influence the decision.
  I would be more concerned about this bill never seeing the light of day because I don’t think the US Congress of this decade is capable of passing any major laws.
  
  The platforms are pushing false and controversial content to drive engagement and have not implemented the necessary guardrails to verify correctness and minimize harm (like, when a post/blog is inciting violence).
  In the current climate I very much doubt that this is how the bill would be used if it became law. It will be used to silence political dissenters and prevent the organization of resistance. Right-wing disinformation will get a pass. Left-wing content will be censored. LGBTQ+ content will be censored. Health advice for trans people will be censored. Black history content will be censored. Women's health and feminist content will be censored. Tech companies are not about to risk the wrath of Trump and huge financial penalties to stand up for these people's right to speak.
  
  You could not possibly sound more like a shill if you tried.
- Oh no! Anyway...
If it accidentally kills Facebook and X, that would be a silver lining. But then again they have the money and connections to be effectively immune, as does Truth Social. It's smaller sites that would suffer, and it would be selectively enforced as another means of political persecution.
The Fediverse might still be OK, but it might become dangerous for US-based admins even if hosting outside the USA.
- Might be dangerous for Fediverse hosters outside the US to visit the US as well.
So Durbin is basically a Republican now huh. Good to know.
- Durbin was one of the 10 that recently voted Yes on the Republican spending bill, so yeah Democrat In Name Only
  
  Haha DINO
  
  Gotta stop voting for him!
Bipartisan? Which democrat is still working with any republican on anything??
- Dick Durbin.
  Apparently he swindled some Illinois voters into voting against their own interests.
  They need to get the memo so they can prevent it from happening again.
Why the fuck is Sheldon Whitehouse sponsoring this??? Does he suddenly have shit for brains?
- Yes. Money talks.
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-whitehouse-rhode-isalnd-club/2021/06/22/9b00419e-d387-11eb-ae54-515e2f63d37d_story.html
  Archive without AI slop here
  https://archive.fo/q3NQz
Good. All the major centralized/corporate social networks are Nazi bars now anyway; nothing of value will be lost if they can no longer exist.
Remember that the Fediverse could survive instances having legal liability for user-posted content because each user could run his own instance.
- All the major centralized/corporate social networks are Nazi bars now anyway; nothing of value will be lost if they can no longer exist.
  Uh... Bluesky? And in the first place it won't be the big platforms losing here, but the small ones. What section 230 does is make it so you don't need a first amendment argument to prevent the courts from controlling what you do with your internet platform, because a first amendment lawsuit is very expensive to run compared to a section 230 lawsuit.
  because each user could run his own instance.
  They can, but that will push many people away.
  
  I don’t buy the smaller platforms being hurt more argument.
  It’s not hard to prevent undue burden on smaller platforms by adding in the bill that it only applies to platforms with more than $1B in revenue.
  We need to get rid of 230 because it has given way too much immunity to the biggest internet companies and they have been simply shrugging away all their responsibilities. Let’s work out how to make this bill work for the people instead of shutting it out.
- The Nazi bars will survive. It's the dissenters and minorities trying to speak in them that will be silenced as a self-protective move by tech corporations.
- But surely one user posting illegal content would get blasted to all connected instances making everyone guilty.
  So... Worse. Much worse.
- Remember that the Fediverse could survive instances having legal liability for user-posted content because each user could run his own instance.
  And this would require each user to run their own instance. The Fediverse is already hard enough to get average folks to join, this would make it nigh impossible for most.
  
  People outside the USA will still run instances. It might become harder for people in the USA to access them, depending on how these measures are enforced.
  
  They'd do it, because the alternative would be no social media at all.
- Damn, it's sad people can be so clueless yet still have a voice.
- Yeah, I'm struggling to see the downside of this personally, which means there is no way in gods green hell it will happen.
Round two: Lindsey Graham vs Elon Musk
WHY ARE PEOPLE VOTING FOR Dick Durbin

33 comments