2 ms·
There's no such thing as a loss of section 230 protections due to editorial bias. https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-yo
by schoen 3y ago
There's no such thing as a loss of section 230 protections due to editorial bias.
https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/ https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referre...
(Sorry if the title of that article seems hostile, since I assume you were asking a genuine question, so you're not actually "wrong" in any sense!)
- walthamstow 3y agoThanks. It's fair enough, I'm not even from the US. Just so I know, which one of the bold-font misnomers in the article have I just repeated?
- schoen 3y agoIt's potentially adjacent to these issues: > If you said “Once a company like that starts moderating content, it’s no longer a platform, but a publisher” > If you said “A site that has political bias is not neutral, and thus loses its Section 230 protections” > If you said “Section 230 was designed to encourage websites to be neutral common carriers” Basically, section 230 was not designed to ban sites from having or exercising their own editorial judgment, or to require them to be passive in other ways. In a sense, its purpose was actually the opposite of that: to allow sites to make editorial judgments about content without getting sued for the content that they did or didn't choose to block.