5 ms·
Companies are now shielded from the government when it comes to user generated content with Section 230. They are not, however, shielded from social justice. An
by d0100 6y ago
Companies are now shielded from the government when it comes to user generated content with Section 230. They are not, however, shielded from social justice. And there lies the problem.
Social spaces and infrastructure should be regulated so that they can be shielded from social justice and the government regarding user generated content.
No one will boycott twitter if they know twitter can't just press a button to ban. No one will ask for demonetization of a YouTube channel if they know that has to come from the legal system. Or pressure companies buying ads that show on channels you don't like
- sockjuice 6y agoCompanies should be shielded from ... the fair treatment of all people in a society? What is your comment even saying? Don't dogwhistle please, write what you really mean.
- dgellow 6y agoOf course people will boycott twitter if the company cannot easily ban content. They will label twitter as a network that promote right wing propaganda and push people to move to other places if they don’t want to be associated with that group.
- due7rurhdu 6y agoThere's a very obvious fix for this which is to simply acknowledge that social media platforms are operating with too much editorial bias to avoid being considered publishers rather than platforms. This acknowledgement creates an environment where the safest strategy to maintain the legal protections that make social media platforms possible is one of minimal censorship.
- dgellow 6y agoMaybe read this: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello...
- pjc50 6y agoThis distinction is only meaningful in US law and does not apply in the UK.