3 ms·
That's not at all a reasonable characterization of 230. https://www.techdirt.com/2021/10/29/everything-you-know-about-section-230-is-wrong-why/ https://www.tec
by hackyhacky 4y ago
That's not at all a reasonable characterization of 230.
https://www.techdirt.com/2021/10/29/everything-you-know-about-section-230-is-wrong-why/ https://www.techdirt.com/2021/10/29/everything-you-know-abou...
Websites and TV stations have the same first amendment protection. The main difference is that users do not contribute content to TV stations. That's what 230 protects.
- cronix 4y agoThere were "public access" shows on cable that showed user generated content. Not so different than the majority of tik-tok content today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G8reRPOoiw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G8reRPOoiw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFBIMKdOdBg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFBIMKdOdBg
- hackyhacky 4y agoActually, very different. Public access was very limited in bandwidth: one simply didn't have thousands of people posting content. As a result, public access was heavily curated and subject to the same broadcast restrictions as traditional television. Even allowing that, public access isn't much of a thing anymore. In modern mainstream television stations, there is absolutely no user-generated content.