The web has changed dramatically since Section 230 was enacted. Our bill is about reaffirming that civil rights protections and consumer safeguards don’t end simply because services and other social and economic activity has increasingly shifted online
Conversation
Replying to
This was a bad idea when Ted Cruz wanted it, and a coat of blue paint doesn't make it look any better. Services are already liable for their own actions; making them liable for users just shields the users from consequences, and encourages overzealous moderation.
2
Replying to
, can you please explain to your constituents in high-COL Northern Virginia why you voted for an amendment to reduce the income threshold from $75,000? I know you're a multimillionaire so it can be hard to relate, but $52,000 in Alexandria or Arlington isn't "rich."
1
1
Replying to
Great; now do the FCC Fairness Doctrine, but expand it to cable broadcast. podcasts, Youtube, & any other medium.
Replying to
I strongly disagree with letting Internet companies police user-generated content. This will lead to censorship and destruction of the freedom of speech on the internet. It’s like asking a power company to police who use electricity/fuel for legal purposes.
2
Replying to
That's not what your bill does, and you know it. Or you should. Learn to write legislation for intended purpose w/o a mass of vague holes in it, or resign!
Don't put sites like out of business because you can't manage to define what an "ad" is
1
Show more replies