“Twitter’s permanent suspension of President Donald Trump’s account is reinvigorating debate about the law that protects social media platforms – specifically, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The statute shields tech companies and news websites from liability for making decisions about what people can say on their platforms, whether they take it down, or leave it up.”
Like many others, I hadn’t heard about Section 230 until just about two weeks ago, and I was curious. Was it really a tool meant to stifle political posting? Was it the only thing keeping online discourse alive? The answer, well-explained in the linked article, is somewhat in-between, with several flaws but heavily leaning towards the side of freedom of expression. It’s of great importance to the internet landscape as we know it, and as the article explains, altering Section 230 needs to come with great forethought or else the unintended consequences will harm those who these proposed changes aim to protect.