3 ms·
Well removing section 230 would actually be deregulation and clarifying the interpretation is just enforcing whats already in place. 230 is legislation that pr
by trident1000 6y ago
Well removing section 230 would actually be deregulation and clarifying the interpretation is just enforcing whats already in place. 230 is legislation that protects tech companies currently. But they are acting as publishers and not platforms which has sparked action.
- Niksko 6y agoThat's purely semantics, and everyone knows it.
- trident1000 6y agoWhat semantics? They were granted immunity with regulation and that regulation/immunity can be taken away.
- boardwaalk 6y agoIf you’re just counting “number of rules on the books”. You could easily imagine a flipped situation where people were trying to add regulation to get the same final effect. I suspect most people think more holistically about regulation than that. Being afraid of being sued and the results of those of those cases being enforced by the government certainly could be interpreted as “bigger government”/more regulation.
- khuey 6y agoRepealing the First Amendment is also "deregulation" by this standard.
- Niksko 6y agoI'll spell it out explicitly, since nobody else has. In a semantic sense, deregulation is the same thing as removing laws. De = remove, regulation = regulation. But what de-regulation really means is "the reduction or elimination of government power in a particular industry". In this case, this law is basically an exemption. Putting the merits or validity of that exemption aside, if you remove the law, you're increasing the power the government has rather than reducing it. The courts now have the power over tech companies to enforce laws that make the tech companies responsible for what is posted on their platform.