4 ms·

“Facebook, [company attorneys] repeatedly argued, is a publisher, and a company that makes editorial decisions, which are protected by the first amendment.” htt

• manfredo 7y ago
  ...which doesn't at all affect their section 230 protections. Again, contrary to popular belief, whether or not a service considers itself a "publisher" or a "platform" has no bearing on its protections under section 230. It's all about whether the content was user generated, or written by the service itself. Why people are dedicating so much attention to the fact that Facebook calls itself a publisher is a mystery to me. See https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/230 https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/230 for more details.
  • mch82 7y ago
    Thanks for that reference. Fan of EFF. I’ll check it out. The case history archive is a pretty cool resource.
  • Nasrudith 7y ago
    It seems to be someone's talking points or more charitably a meme (differentiated by how organic the idea is). The publisher/platform dichotomy is a flat out wrong myth which keeps on being repeated - and often from high places. I would call it outright propaganda at this point because the dogged insistence on not listening to objective facts seems more "big lie" style opinion shaping than mere ignorance which has caught on. At this point I reflexive downvote all who repeat it uncritically as "fact".