3 ms·

Basically, - Unless they stop calling out Trump, they lose Section 230 protections. Section 230 is what allows a platform like Twitter or Hacker News to do lim

by geofft 6y ago

Basically, - Unless they stop calling out Trump, they lose Section 230 protections. Section 230 is what allows a platform like Twitter or Hacker News to do limited good-faith moderation and not be deemed editorially responsible for every piece of nonsense someone tweets/posts that they don't get around to moderating. Without it, you either have to moderate heavily and get everything right, or not moderate at all. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicati... - pre-Section 230, CompuServe did no moderation and was ruled not responsible for libelous user comments, and Prodigy did and was ruled responsible for something they failed to moderate, and people went "Wait a second, this seems like the opposite of what we want.") The executive order says, roughly, that the behavior Trump doesn't like isn't permissible under Section 230 and makes you editorially responsible for everything, so if you enjoy your Section 230 protections, you can't do that. - The executive branch is discouraged from spending funds (i.e., buying ads) on platform that Trump doesn't like. - The FTC will go after these platforms for unfair trade practices. - The US attorney general will team up with state attorney generals to see if there's any state laws they can wield against these platforms too.

trevyn 6y ago
I think bringing back the CompuServe model would be a good thing. I remember the discussions being unusually free at the time, but was not aware that there was legal reasoning that enforced that freedom.
- geofft 6y ago
  There's nothing prohibiting you from running a forum on the CompuServe model today - Section 230 permits a forum operator to moderate but does not require them to do so. There are less-moderated forums out there, but they see less popular in the free market. I think the main argument for Section 230 is it made no sense to legally require the CompuServe model - both CompuServe and Prodigy should have been free to operate as they were doing.
  - trevyn 6y ago
    It may be a harm to society to allow things to happen as they have been, though -- platforms started out as reasonably free, with only the most egregious content removed, used this freedom to develop a moat, and then are gradually restricting more and more content, while retaining their moat.

by geofft 6y ago

trevyn 6y ago

I think bringing back the CompuServe model would be a good thing. I remember the discussions being unusually free at the time, but was not aware that there was legal reasoning that enforced that freedom.

geofft 6y ago
There's nothing prohibiting you from running a forum on the CompuServe model today - Section 230 permits a forum operator to moderate but does not require them to do so. There are less-moderated forums out there, but they see less popular in the free market. I think the main argument for Section 230 is it made no sense to legally require the CompuServe model - both CompuServe and Prodigy should have been free to operate as they were doing.
- trevyn 6y ago
  It may be a harm to society to allow things to happen as they have been, though -- platforms started out as reasonably free, with only the most egregious content removed, used this freedom to develop a moat, and then are gradually restricting more and more content, while retaining their moat.