Is the excuse/get out of gaol free card/interpretation that Twitter and Facebook use - as they claim innocence due to their being only platforms and not publishers - about to be made redundant? From the Federal Communications Commission's website: FCC General Counsel Thomas M. Johnson Jr. writes "Last week, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced his intent to move forward with a rulemaking to interpret Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934. Under certain circumstances, Section 230 provides websites, including social media companies, that host or moderate content generated by others with immunity from liability."
"Section 230 provides, among other things, that "[n]o 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." It further provides that "[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of . . . any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.""
What constitutes material that can be excluded as 'otherwise objectionable'? Well we know that, anything that helps president Trump and/or is a bombshell against a Democrat, most recently Biden and 'the laptop from Hell' to quote The Donald.
There are critics on both sides, an not just from the 'Orange Man Bad' crew. I heard about it from Dan.
Otherwise objectionable gear from: Techdirt
