The protection isn't moral, whatever that means to you, in nature in the first place its practical. Even with expensive manual review of all user generated con

The protection isn't moral, whatever that means to you, in nature in the first place its practical. Even with expensive manual review of all user generated content our society is so litigious and litigation so expensive that nobody could afford long term to offer user generated content. Basically without forcing liability for content to be between the person wronged and the person responsible for the wrong doing the internet as we know it basically can't exist. Moderating nothing instead means communities turn into cesspools of hate where an increasing number become afraid or disinterested in engaging. Meanwhile increasingly evil and radical ideas become normalized in the context of these echo chambers damaging our society. Furthermore the idea that if they must choose between zero interference and full responsibility is a false dichotomy invented from whole cloth not in support of neutrality but as a last ditch defense against inevitable social change.