It is exactly describing neutrality on truthiness. There literally is no other definition. You take no side on truth. I wouldn’t, nor have I seen anyone, sugge

It is exactly describing neutrality on truthiness. There literally is no other definition. You take no side on truth. I wouldn’t, nor have I seen anyone, suggest that this is something to push for on every private business/platform/etc in existence. The point to be made is twofold: 1) Have the large social media platforms developed into general spheres of public discourse and thus have become central to ongoing function of public life? If so, then ANY active control over the narratives allowed on the platforms if is of critical concern to the function of Democracy. 2) Separate from point #1 which is broader than Section 230, is whether or not control over the narratives allowed on the platforms is equivalent to editorial moderation at publishers, changing them from being governed by Section 230? To be clear, I don’t know the answers to either of these questions. But I sure as shit know that I would prefer major realms of public discourse to be free of some bull shit “arbiter of truth” controlling the presentation of people’s thoughts in them.