David French, Time, January 24, 2020, writes that it is misguided to rewrite Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act that safeguards internet free speech by not holding platforms responsible for their users’ content. The Act also allows internet providers to remove obscene, harassing and violent content without being held liable for user content. Missouri Senator Josh Hawley is proposing requiring social media companies to prove to the Federal Trade Commission that they are not moderating content in a way “designed to negatively affect a political party, political candidate, or political viewpoint.” Presidential candidate Joe Biden proposed eliminating Section 230. Without Section 230 companies would have to greatly restrict or shut down forums.
Naval Academy professor Jeff Kosseff, Lawfare, December 19, 2019, provides an extensive history of the need for Section 230, its passage within a more comprehensive law, subsequent court challenges and the final outcome. Kosseff points out that while platforms can freely moderate or not moderate user content, users can decide where they want to go for content rather than endure government regulation. Kosseff quotes a report from the Center for Democracy and Technology, “To be sure, some system operators will want to offer services that prescreen content. However, if all systems were forced to do so, the usefulness of digital media as communication and information dissemination systems would be drastically limited. Where possible, we must avoid legal structures that force those who merely carry messages to screen their content.”