Yes, I understand. I understand Section 230 and the First Amendment. Imagine two scenarios: 1. The Meta corporate entity posts a call to arms to kill the pres

Yes, I understand. I understand Section 230 and the First Amendment. Imagine two scenarios: 1. The Meta corporate entity posts a call to arms to kill the president. It is algorithmically shown at the top of every user's feed. 2. Famous actor Tom Cruise posts a call to arms to kill the president. It is algorithmically shown at the top of every user's feed. In the first scenario, Facebook would be liable for inciting violence. In the second, it would not be. The difference is that Facebook is not responsible for anything posted by Tom Cruise. That effectively allows Facebook to "speak" with impunity as long as they use Facebook users as volunteer sockpuppets. This is only possible because of Section 230. Otherwise they'd be liable for any illegal speech on the platform, regardless of whether the algorithm spreads it or not.