Apparently Trump Refuses To Allow The Government To Do Anything At All Until The Open Internet Is Destroyed

Apparently Trump Refuses To Allow The Government To Do Anything At All Until The Open Internet Is Destroyed

Section 230 protects working Americans more than it protects “big tech.” It protects us posting on social media. It protects us forwarding emails. It protects us when we retweet nonsense. It makes the open internet possible, and enables the next generation of competitors to “big tech” to exist. Lindsey Graham’s weird grandstanding about this is nonsense. Taking away 230 wouldn’t rein in big tech, it would lock in big tech. They have large legal teams and can handle the disruption. This is why Facebook already supports major 230 reform. Zuckerberg knows that it would harm upstart competitors way more than Facebook.

More About Section 230:

Communications Decency Act – Section 230

Is Trump protecting Big Tech from competition or does he really want more censorship?!

Section 230 Is the Internet’s First Amendment. Now Both Republicans and Democrats Want To Take It Away.

Section 230 Is the Internet’s First Amendment. Now Both Republicans and Democrats Want To Take It Away.

Section 230 Is The Subject of The Most Effective Legal Propaganda I’ve Ever Seen

Section 230 Is The Subject of The Most Effective Legal Propaganda I’ve Ever Seen

Nonetheless, in Congress and on television and on the internet, accurate descriptions of what Section 230 says, and what it does, are usually overwhelmed by misconceptions (the charitable interpretation) or lies and propaganda (the more accurate one). Some of the most prominent politicians in the country — notably Senator Ted Cruz — routinely lie to the public about what the law says and how courts have interpreted it. Among the most common lies: Section 230 requires sites to choose between being a “platform” or “publisher”, Section 230 requires sites to moderate content in a neutral fashion, Section 230 is some sort of “gift” to the tech industry, and sites lose Section 230 protections if they demonstrate a viewpoint. These are not just different takes on the law, or arguable interpretations. These are flat-out lies. Section 230 doesn’t say any of that and every court to rule has rejected those hot takes.

Trump Still Hates The 1st Amendment: Meeting With State Attorneys General To Tell Them To Investigate Internet Companies For Bias

Trump Still Hates The 1st Amendment: Meeting With State Attorneys General To Tell Them To Investigate Internet Companies For Bias

Of course, the State AGs would need a big change to Section 230 to be able to go after social media for bias — but they’d need an even bigger change to the 1st Amendment, which allows companies to choose which content to host — and what content not to host. If Trump and the DOJ think that law enforcement can investigate social media for anti-conservative bias, does that mean he’d be okay if AGs in other states investigate Fox News for bias? Or Breitbart? Of course not. The 1st Amendment doesn’t allow it, and so we get another stupid culture war from the President shitting on the Constitution he swore to uphold and protect.

Related:

Authors Of CDA 230 Do Some Serious 230 Mythbusting In Response To Comments Submitted To The FCC