Are Facebook and Twitter protected by a shield that stops them from being responsible for any of their content? We bring on Mike Masnick from TechDirt and Shoshana Weissman from the R Street Institute to talk about what Section 230 is, what it isn’t, and whether it needs to be changed.
Please SUBSCRIBE HERE.
Subscribe through Apple Podcasts.
A special thanks to all our supporters–without you, none of this would be possible.
If you are willing to support the show or to give as little as 10 cents a day on Patreon, Thank you!
Become a Patron!
Big thanks to Dan Lueders for the headlines music and Martin Bell for the opening theme!
Big thanks to Mustafa A. from thepolarcat.com for the logo!
Thanks to Anthony Lemos of Ritual Misery for the expanded show notes!
Thanks to our mods, Kylde, Jack_Shid, KAPT_Kipper, and scottierowland on the subreddit
Send to email to [email protected]
Shoshana Weissmann, Senior Manager of Digital Media and a policy Fellow at the R Street Institute.
Mike Masnick, founder and CEO of the Copia Institute and editor of the Techdirt blog.
Our discussion isn’t a substitute for, nor does it constitute, legal advice. The goal of this discussion is to explore some of the legal issues surrounding CDA 230.
The central text of Section 230
(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
There is also a section right after that on Civil Liability that offers further protections for taking certain moderation actions.
— What is Section 230 designed to do?
— What are some of the major misconceptions about Section 230?
— If section 230 were repealed with no replacement, what do you think the effect would be?
— Do you believe Congress should replace 230? If so, with what? If not, why?
-Fix a typo
-Remove intellectual exemption property