Repealing Section 230 isn’t about holding big tech accountable—it’s about cementing their dominance while devastating smaller platforms, independent creators, everyday users, and the open, innovative internet as we know it.
The rhetoric around repeal often frames it as a way to force “Big Tech” (like Meta, Google, or X) to face consequences for harmful content, misinformation, or poor moderation. But in practice, removing the liability shield for user-generated content would backfire spectacularly on that goal.
Big Tech companies have massive legal teams, billions in cash reserves, and entrenched market power. They could absorb the flood of lawsuits that would follow repeal—defending against defamation claims, product liability suits, or any user-posted harm—while continuing to operate largely as before. Smaller competitors, startups, nonprofits, forums, review sites, and emerging platforms would be crushed under the same legal costs and risks, unable to afford robust defenses or even basic moderation at scale. This would reduce competition, entrench monopolies, and make the dominant players even harder to challenge.
Experts from groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) have pointed out repeatedly that Section 230 protects users and smaller services far more than the giants—it’s why some Big Tech figures have even endorsed gutting it in certain proposals. Repeal would lead to over-cautious moderation (removing anything remotely “risky” to avoid suits), under-moderation in some cases, or outright shutdowns of user-driven features like comments, reviews, and sharing. That doesn’t punish Big Tech; it hands them an even bigger moat while chilling free expression, innovation, speech and access for everyone else.
True accountability for platform harms—like better child safety tools, algorithmic transparency, or antitrust enforcement—requires targeted reforms, not blanket repeal that plays into the hands of the very companies critics claim to target. The push often stems from misunderstandings or political posturing, but the outcome would make the internet smaller, less diverse, and more controlled by a handful of already insanely powerful oligarchs.
What do you think the repeal of Section 230 would mean for new platforms like UpScrolled, that were created to fight censorship when bad-faith actors go and spam it with violative content? You think a small tech company like that can survive an onslaught of lawsuits? This would strangle any tech company that already doesn’t monopolize the market in the crib. THIS ISN’T FOR YOU! WAKE UP!
Repealing Section 230 ONLY Benefits Those ALREADY IN POWER
Don’t Let Them Repeal Section 230!
Related:
Ms. Cat’s Chronicles 