At the center of the controversy between free speech and the rights of private companies lies Section 230, the controversial U.S. code dating back to 1996.
Toward the end of his term in 2020, former President Donald Trump famously tweeted that Section 230 should be “completely terminated.” Sen. Josh Hawley, Sen. Lindsey Graham, and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard voiced their support, but by and large, the sentiment was met with fierce resistance.
Advocates for the reform (or complete repeal) of Section 230 argue that it shields Big Tech companies from accountability when they engage in politically-motivated censorship and content moderation. Supporters of Section 230 argue that it is essential to keep the internet free of misinformation and vile or obscene material.
Section 230
The Communications Decency Act was crafted in 1996. Internet platforms were just beginning to boom, which led to many legal questions needing answers, especially when it came to what should be allowed online and who would have the power to police such content. Specific concern focused on sexual and pornographic material online.
Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Representative Chris Cox (R-MN) co-sponsored the Communications Decency Act to address the problems arising online.
Section 230(c) reads:
(1) No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
(2) No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of –
a. any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
b. any action taken to enable ..
Support the originator by clicking the read the rest link below.
