HomeUploadUpload DirectHotlinkRandomAbouttheme toggle

Politicians Want to Destroy Section 230, the Internet's First Amendment

Views: 961
Reason's Elizabeth Nolan Brown reviews four myths about Section 230, the law that protects free speech online, put out by politicians and media personalities.
------------------
Subscribe to our YouTube channel: http://youtube.com/reasontv
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Reason.Magazine/
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/reason
Subscribe to our podcast at Apple Podcasts: https://goo.gl/az3a7a

Reason is the leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of view you won't get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.
----------------
Television personalities and politicians, from Tucker Carlson to Nancy Pelosi, are calling for changes to the law that has protected the internet since the '90s. But they don't seem to have a clue about what it actually says, or whom it really protects.

Section 230 is a portion of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. It has made the internet as we know it possible by establishing that tech companies are not responsible for what their users post on their apps, websites, and devices. Section 230 allows for the free exchange of ideas on the internet—and it may be just as important to online free speech as the First Amendment.

Section 230's most important sentence reads as follows:

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.

Critics have come up with creative ways of distorting what the law says. Here are four myths to watch out for:

Myth 1: Tech Companies Must Be Neutral

"Neutrality" is not a condition of the law. Section 230 was designed in part so that internet companies could discriminate by filtering out content that's illegal, indecent, or otherwise objectionable. Before Section 230, online companies feared that any moderation would make them legally liable for user content. Section 230 explicitly says that's not the case—"good faith" and "voluntary" attempts to filter out unwanted posts and users are OK. 

Without Section 230, it would be hard for companies to avoid lawsuits and criminal charges without either becoming cesspools of totally unmoderated speech or banning user-generated speech entirely.

Myth 2: Section 230 Makes a Distinction Between Platform and Publisher

There is no legal distinction in Section 230 between a "publisher" and a "platform." The word "platform" doesn't even appear. What matters for legal purposes is who is responsible for creating particular web content. 

Judgment calls about user speech—however poorly executed, and whatever ideological biases are apparent—just don't affect whether a company is broadly protected by Section 230 or not.

Myth 3: Section 230 Shields Big Tech From Legal Liability

People like to pretend 230 created a legal "loophole," but the congress that passed Section 230 back in 1996 was explicit: Section 230 would not apply when it comes to federal criminal laws or intellectual property law. That means copyright violators and serious criminals do not get a free pass because of Section 230.

What the law does provide is limited protection from criminal charges brought by state or local law authorities and some immunity from getting sued in civil court.

This immunity is lost if a company:

Creates illegal content itself or edits content in a way that contributes to its illegality
Participates in illegal acts to obtain content
Engages in or profits directly from some illicit action

Section 230 is meant to leave room for holding online operators accountable for their own sins but not for those of their customers.

Myth 4: Section 230 Is Only for Large Tech Companies

Section 230 doesn't only benefit companies. As attorney Jeff Kosseff, author of The 26 Words That Created the Internet, puts it: "There also are significant free speech benefits to the public."

Section 230 shields not just the providers of digital services from litigation but the users of these services, too. Without it, anyone could find themselves liable for retweeting, reblogging, or posting links to content that is later found to break the law.

Yet for all the protections it provides to readers, writers, academics, shitposters, entrepreneurs, activists, and amateur political pundits of every persuasion, Section 230 has somehow become a political pariah.

The political class wants everyone to believe that the way the U.S. has policed the internet for the past quarter-century has actually been lax, immoral, and dangerous.

Don't believe them. The future of free speech—and a lot more—may depend on preserving Section 230.

Written by Elizabeth Nolan Brown. Edited by Paul Detrick.

Giant by The Grand Affair is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Source: https://www.youtube.com/audiolibrarydownload?vid=46110e91d40fbb0c
@ReasonVidsfollow
Thumbnail for Hong Kong Protesters Want Democracy, Accountability, Autonomy, and U.S. Support3:45
Hong Kong Protesters Want Democracy, Accountability, Autonomy, and U.S. Support
ReasonVids
744 views
Thumbnail for Is It Wrong for a Country to Maintain Its Ethnic Balance?3:35
Is It Wrong for a Country to Maintain Its Ethnic Balance?
AmericanRenaissance
2180 views
Thumbnail for Los Angeles County Banned Outdoor Dining. There's Zero Evidence It Spreads COVID-19.5:32
Los Angeles County Banned Outdoor Dining. There's Zero Evidence It Spreads COVID-19.
ReasonVids
867 views
Thumbnail for Reason's Secret Recipe for Nutrient-Rich Coverage of the Trump Era0:58
Reason's Secret Recipe for Nutrient-Rich Coverage of the Trump Era
ReasonVids
937 views
Thumbnail for Boxer Brings Up Race For No Reason. Doesn’t End Well.0:25
Boxer Brings Up Race For No Reason. Doesn’t End Well.
AOUisgay
387 views
Thumbnail for "We Don't Need More Copyright" - Tom W. Bell on Intellectual Property8:29
"We Don't Need More Copyright" - Tom W. Bell on Intellectual Property
ReasonVids
853 views
Thumbnail for Stossel: The Rise Of Citizen Journalists4:34
Stossel: The Rise Of Citizen Journalists
ReasonVids
794 views
Thumbnail for Trump can’t speak jeet 0:08
Trump can’t speak jeet
bestofupgoat
72 views
Thumbnail for British Gal Gets Americanized0:17
British Gal Gets Americanized
AOUisgay
3211 views
Thumbnail for Literal monkeys go to the fair. 2:20
Literal monkeys go to the fair.
AOU
1978 views
Thumbnail for Net Neutrality Nixed: Why John Oliver is Wrong4:11
Net Neutrality Nixed: Why John Oliver is Wrong
ReasonVids
816 views
Thumbnail for Shin Kazuma (Galaxy Fight) vs Yagumo (Kabuki Klash) - M.U.G.E.N.1:42
Shin Kazuma (Galaxy Fight) vs Yagumo (Kabuki Klash) - M.U.G.E.N.
memology101
1139 views
Thumbnail for Based dude explains the value of closed borders 1:17
Based dude explains the value of closed borders
bestofupgoat
58 views
Thumbnail for deftones - Beauty School | SuperDeftoner4:51
deftones - Beauty School | SuperDeftoner
invidious
274 views
Thumbnail for CPAC: The Conservative Case for Criminal Justice Reform3:51
CPAC: The Conservative Case for Criminal Justice Reform
ReasonVids
908 views
Thumbnail for BlackRock CEO Larry Fink Is Trying to Change the World Using Other People's Money0:30
BlackRock CEO Larry Fink Is Trying to Change the World Using Other People's Money
bestofpoal
1357 views
Thumbnail for Joe Biden Non-Campaign Ad0:45
Joe Biden Non-Campaign Ad
ReasonVids
937 views
Thumbnail for this guy is my spirit animal0:33
this guy is my spirit animal
bestofupgoat
71 views
Thumbnail for Hemp History Week: Ending the War on George Washington's Favorite Crop4:49
Hemp History Week: Ending the War on George Washington's Favorite Crop
ReasonVids
831 views
Thumbnail for Are the COVID-19 Lockdowns Constitutional?7:12
Are the COVID-19 Lockdowns Constitutional?
ReasonVids
945 views
Thumbnail for Hot Dogs and Meth | Grunt Speak Shorts7:25
Hot Dogs and Meth | Grunt Speak Shorts
Terrence Popp
610 views
Thumbnail for These Doctors Exemplify the Virtues of Free Market Medicine7:14
These Doctors Exemplify the Virtues of Free Market Medicine
ReasonVids
964 views

points

Permalink
Reply
libertarian, reason magazine, reason.com, reason.tv, reasontv, section 230, tucker carlson, ted cruz, nancy pelosi, josh hawley, free speech
TOS  •  Add Keywords  •  Donate  •   Analytics  •   DMCA  •   Puzzle