Trying to legislate a “neutrality” requirement for web platforms would be unconstitutional and unworkable. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/no-section-230-does-not-require-platforms-be-neutral …
-
-
Replying to @EFF
Y’all are on the wrong side of the particular electronic frontier, folks. Nothing is more dangerous for American democracy now than a private censorship regime imposed uniformly by giant corporations with the goal of controlling or shaping public discourse.
3 replies 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @EFF
Mixing concepts here. Like it or not, in the current framework free speech is protected only vs public actors. A private platform can erase content by platform owner FS Title 230 is an unrelated non-liability clause. Does not equate private forum=public FS. But perhaps it should.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Exactly. Private companies receive section 230 protection AND can censor as they wish, even when they reach monopoly scale. They should have to choose. Either honor free speech and be protected, or censor and be liable for everything users say or do on the platform.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.