Tulsi Gabbard supports Repeal of Section 230

[Mook]

The cost of moderating the internet will be passed on to the consumer

More paid jobs for content creators

 

[NZA]

If they disallow moderation, you wind up with spam, trolling, porn, violent content, etc. .

 

[Pressure]

Hard pass for any repeal plan that does not have a replacement that would repeal government overreach.

 

[Swaggatron]

Some if y'all gonna have your feelings hurt by thinking life long liar Biden and Kamala Shakur won't do some of these things themselves...Biden repeatedly in the past called for cutting Social Security and Medicare...you think 230 is safe with them?

 

[BillBanneker]

Have you read about or seen how content moderation works on big sites? FB gets millions of posts per minute
from all over the world. Some things will inevitably slip through the cracks. It's crazy that they are able to keep as much of a handle on it as they are. The people who do moderation need therapy for the shyt they have to see and eliminate.

This is actually the problem. They're too massive to manage any they only took any moderation seriously when the feds started talking about breaking them up, not due to the proliferation of socially harmful content on their platform. Think its better just breaking them, without affecting 230.


Anyway I doubt anything will happen with section 230 cause it's locked into signed trade agreements as @FAH1223 posted:

 

[the cac mamba]

Because eventually the free market decides who gets access because only certain people will be able to afford it and guess who those people will be?

second best running joke in HL

second only to napoleon being indian, even though he isnt

 

[Piffiztheanswer]

What the deal with tulsi monroe?

Jame monroe

Or rose monroe

 

[mr. smoke weed]

Well you know what. It's too fukking bad, but that's what needs to happen. There is no more wild west unless our government keeps being corrupt. Internet shoulda been regulated as soon as the iphone was invented. Once the squares had unmetered access to it, it was a wrap.

Holy shyt you're not 100% wrong about something friend. I'ma text ya

 

[mr. smoke weed]

Some if y'all gonna have your feelings hurt by thinking life long liar Biden and Kamala Shakur won't do some of these things themselves...Biden repeatedly in the past called for cutting Social Security and Medicare...you think 230 is safe with them?

Kamala Shakur? I don't get it. Is that an insult?

 

[hashmander]

Kamala Shakur? I don't get it. Is that an insult?

something about her slipping in an interview and saying 2pac was here favorite rapper alive or some shyt.

 

[FAH1223]

 

[Retired Account]

i came across this thread when doing my own research. Section 230 was made to increase moderation not reduce it.

"Indeed, this is one key reason why Section 230 was written in the first place. It was done in response to a ruling in the Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy lawsuit, in which Prodigy, in an effort to provide a "family friendly" environment, did some moderation of its message boards. The judge in that case rules that since Prodigy did moderate the boards, that meant it would be liable for anything it left up."

After the ruling, moderation would make sites liable for user post so site refused to moderate.


Repealing section 230 would not get rid all internet hate speech because there is hate speech that is protected by the 1st amendment. Hate groups would still exist and would sue sites like thecoli for defamation.

Hello! You've Been Referred Here Because You're Wrong About Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act

 

[Isaiah Bradley]

expect victims of social media slander and bias coverage to not want to hold them accountable brehs. Where's Bernie, IIhan and AOC to co-sign this repeal?

Spoiler

SOLUTION: "social media shouldn’t offer to fact check at all" -Zuckerberg

Those who desire safe spaces and echo chambers, up your filter skills instead of encroaching on others' experience

 

[bnew]

I thought this would make the internet more censored not less? If they are are a publisher and responsible for content won't they increase their oversight by a lot?

it can go both ways.

Why the internet’s most important law exists and how people are still getting it wrong

snippet:

To really understand Section 230, you have to go all the way back to the 1950s. There was a Los Angeles ordinance that said if you have obscene material in your store, you can be held criminally responsible. So a vice officer sees this erotic book that he believes is obscene. Eleazar Smith, who owns the store, is prosecuted, and he’s sentenced to 30 days in jail.

This goes all the way up to the Supreme Court, and what the Supreme Court says is that the Los Angeles ordinance is unconstitutional. There’s absolutely no way that a distributor like a bookstore could review every bit of content before they sell it. So if you’re a distributor, you’re going to be liable only if you knew, or should have known, that what you’re distributing is illegal.

“Congress did not want platforms to be these neutral conduits, whatever that means. It wanted the platforms to moderate content.”

Then we get to these early internet services like CompuServe and Prodigy in the early ‘90s. CompuServe is like the Wild West. It basically says, “We’re not going to moderate anything.” Prodigy says, “We’re going to have moderators, and we’re going to prohibit bad stuff from being online.” They’re both, not surprisingly, sued for defamation based on third-party content.


CompuServe’s lawsuit is dismissed because what the judge says is, yeah, CompuServe is the electronic equivalent of a newsstand or bookstore. The court rules that Prodigy doesn’t get the same immunity because Prodigy actually did moderate content, so Prodigy is more like a newspaper’s letter to the editor page. So you get this really weird rule where these online platforms can reduce their liability by not moderating content.


That really is what triggered the proposal of Section 230. For Congress, the motivator for Section 230 was that it did not want platforms to be these neutral conduits, whatever that means. It wanted the platforms to moderate content.