> In fact, I don't really care model they pick: they should be held legally liable when they curate an editorial headline that is libelous Give me an example o

> In fact, I don't really care model they pick: they should be held legally liable when they curate an editorial headline that is libelous Give me an example of such a headline. Note that a tweet, any tweet, is not twitters editorial content. So you're looking for something like the trending topics headlines (which Twitter doesn't have 230 protection regarding!) Because, and this is really important: legally speaking, Twitter doesn't exercise editorial control over tweets. Moderation isn't editorial control under the law. > They used to say they were "The Free Speech Wing of the Free Speech Party." Twitter did? I sure didn't. Who are you talking about? > Here: https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-rules-twitter-can-be-su https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-rules-twitter-can-be-su... This is not the dunk you think it is. In a world without section 230, Twitter would be required to leave this content up short of a court order.