4 ms·

But at what point does content moderation turn an editor into the speaker and thus liable? As an extreme case I could censor many letters of your post leaving

by me2021yuh 6y ago

But at what point does content moderation turn an editor into the speaker and thus liable? As an extreme case I could censor many letters of your post leaving only a few letters expressing something you never expressed. Many people I've heard from on the right are making this case, not arguing to abolish 230, just to clarify it such that moderation is a form of speech and thus invites liability. Even Dershowitz made that point.

8note 6y ago
Section 230 is clear on that, isn't it? Does the moderation happen before or after the post is visible?
- ttt0 6y ago
  On major platforms it's both
mdpopescu 6y ago
Censoring? I've had posts EDITED on a stack exchange platform. Multiple times, with the result saying the opposite of what I said. I did the only thing I could do, stopped using that site. Just like with Facebook :)
zuminator 6y ago
Selectively censoring letters so as to change the meaning of a post is not what is commonly thought of as moderation. Anyway, I think you’re losing the bead a little here. Speech isn’t liable because it’s speech. It’s liable because it’s slanderous or defamatory. So calling moderation “speech” doesn’t suddenly invite liability, unless we’re claiming that the very act of exclusion is prima facie defamation, which is a more dangerous idea than the problem you’re trying to solve in the first place. If moderation as such were to be actionable, then my shitty band could sue you for not including us in your shared Spotify playlist. It would open the door for any sort of public curation whatsoever to carry legal risks. Losing the tool of moderation would kill off this very forum, which would become overrun by crackpots, trolls, and V1Agra spam in short order. By pruning the weeds of bad-faith discourse, moderation allows good-faith open discussion to thrive.

8note 6y ago

Section 230 is clear on that, isn't it? Does the moderation happen before or after the post is visible?

ttt0 6y ago
On major platforms it's both

mdpopescu 6y ago

Censoring? I've had posts EDITED on a stack exchange platform. Multiple times, with the result saying the opposite of what I said. I did the only thing I could do, stopped using that site. Just like with Facebook :)

zuminator 6y ago

Selectively censoring letters so as to change the meaning of a post is not what is commonly thought of as moderation. Anyway, I think you’re losing the bead a little here. Speech isn’t liable because it’s speech. It’s liable because it’s slanderous or defamatory. So calling moderation “speech” doesn’t suddenly invite liability, unless we’re claiming that the very act of exclusion is prima facie defamation, which is a more dangerous idea than the problem you’re trying to solve in the first place. If moderation as such were to be actionable, then my shitty band could sue you for not including us in your shared Spotify playlist. It would open the door for any sort of public curation whatsoever to carry legal risks. Losing the tool of moderation would kill off this very forum, which would become overrun by crackpots, trolls, and V1Agra spam in short order. By pruning the weeds of bad-faith discourse, moderation allows good-faith open discussion to thrive.