SeMgCo87 said:
waco_aggie05 said:
Instead of repealing the whole section, can they not just declare Twitter and Facebook as publishers vs platforms? Who determines classification?
This is the exact issue...FB, Twitter and Google are publishers, meaning they do have control over what is pushed by contributors, but they were exempted from liability by Section 230. And check the fine print...I think it either implies they become owners of the content, or implies it.
They like to claim they are platforms (providing a soap box to every Tom, Dick and Harry), but Section 230 enables them to control the message, as if they were owners, but still appearing to be platforms.
However, at this point they have such broad usage, that it would be difficult for people to give these tools up. I think revoking Sec 230 may not help entirely. That's what is enabling their "selective" moderation. A better course may be to get more narrowly defined protections, so that they can get their ass sued big time if they don't equitably censor content. EQUITABLY, BUT NOT FAIRLY. There is no FAIRNESS in the law, only EQUITY.
That's probably exactly what should happen. They have no business suspending accounts or saying something is "false" just out of the gate just because they don't agree with it. Especially of Senators of Pennslyvania and White House announcements.
In fact, always thought the "strip 230" protections referred to a
re-designation of Big Tech as not platforms anymore, NOT repealing Section 230 from the books.
Its blatantly obvious they are putting thumbs on scale as pro-Democrat entities -- not mere platforms. They even suppress the other side's view on behalf of the Democratic Party.
FrioAg 00:
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
