Section 230 is in Washington’s crosshairs

Democrats and Republicans don’t seem to agree on much these days… except when it comes to amending Section 230, a law that gives broad legal protections to websites hosting user-generated content.

But as you can probably guess, the hand-holding and kumbaya’s fade away from there. Cuz while both sides agree that Section 230 needs to change, they have very different ideas about what those changes should look like.

🌐 Background: Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act is one of the most important laws governing how the Internet works in America today. In fact, many experts argue that it’s laid the groundwork for current online giants – Google, Facebook, Twitter, Yelp, TikTok, Reddit, etc. – to thrive.

Essentially, Section 230 means two things: 1) websites can’t be sued for libel or defamation in regards to users’ posts, and 2) websites can moderate themselves by removing posts – so long as they’re acting in “good faith.”

• For example: if a TikTok user claims Elon Musk is actually a muskrat in disguise, TikTok itself can’t be sued for libel/defamation – only the post’s original author can.
• TikTok also can’t be sued if it decides to remove that user’s post in “good faith” (as decided by a judge, if it comes to that).

🏛️ That brings us to last week… when President Biden called on Congress to remove some legal protections in Section 230, echoing a move from former President Trump. But the two sides disagree over how to amend the law:

• Democrats want to hold tech companies liable – aka able to be sued – for failing to remove posts that include extremist content, like hate speech and misinformation.
• Republicans want the 1st Amendment to apply to social media sites, even though they’re private actors.

📊 Flash poll: Do you think Section 230 needs to be changed?

Yes

No

Unsure/other