"The old way of thinking about how to make #socialplatforms safer was that you had to make them do more #contentmoderation.
But by the mid-2020s, almost everyone knew both adults & children who struggled to regulate their usage of apps and suffered as a result.
Regulators & plaintiffs’ attorneys began new investigations into whether a #socialapp might be held liable not for what people said on it, but rather how it worked.
Increasingly, it appears they will."
#Section230
https://www.platformer.news/social-media-addiction-trial-eu-tiktok-investigation/

@taylorlorenz Thank you! 👍 More people need to learn about this. Although this is #US-specific, the arguments basically apply worldwide. If we start to punish platforms for "bad" user content, it would nuke the #Internet.

I already knew #Section230, but I still learned a lot.

I also feel your frustration of the IGNORANCE of many people about this subject, including those who SHOULD know better. And then letting the religious zealots give a free win. It's concerning.

"The old way of thinking about how to make #socialplatforms safer was that you had to make them do more #contentmoderation.
But by the mid-2020s, almost everyone knew both adults & children who struggled to regulate their usage of apps and suffered as a result.
Regulators & plaintiffs’ attorneys began new investigations into whether a #socialapp might be held liable not for what people said on it, but rather how it worked.
Increasingly, it appears they will."
#Section230
https://www.platformer.news/social-media-addiction-trial-eu-tiktok-investigation/

I like what Joseph Gordon-Levitt is doing. It's incredibly tough to stand up to big tech.

#BigTech #SunsetSection230 #Section230 #OnlineSafety #USPol #JosephGordonLevitt

Americans!

If the massive number of internet censorship bills already introduced wasn't enough, Lindsey Graham, along with a handful of co-sponsers (Durbin, Blumenthal, Whitehouse, Klobucher, and Hawley), intends to reintroduce his bill to sunset Section 230 next week.

Section 230 is what allows many websites to exist at all. If this bill passes, many smaller websites will be forced to shut down, and mainstream platforms will either abandon moderation altogether or remove anything even vaguely controversial to avoid lawsuits.

Regular people would be unable to post on sites that take the latter approach (acting as publishers) and would have their voices drowned out by scams and hate speech on sites that take former approach (abandon moderation entirely).

Getting rid of Section 230 would not result in more free speech, it would not "hold Big Tech accountable," or whatever else people like Graham and these co-sponsers say repealing Section 230 would accomplish.

Please call your Senators and Representatives!

https://www.badinternetbills.com/

#Privacy #FreeSpeech #Censorship #Internet #DigitalRights #Section230 #US #UnitedStates

Americans!

If the massive number of internet censorship bills already introduced wasn't enough, Lindsey Graham, along with a handful of co-sponsers (Durbin, Blumenthal, Whitehouse, Klobucher, and Hawley), intends to reintroduce his bill to sunset Section 230 next week.

Section 230 is what allows many websites to exist at all. If this bill passes, many smaller websites will be forced to shut down, and mainstream platforms will either abandon moderation altogether or remove anything even vaguely controversial to avoid lawsuits.

Regular people would be unable to post on sites that take the latter approach (acting as publishers) and would have their voices drowned out by scams and hate speech on sites that take former approach (abandon moderation entirely).

Getting rid of Section 230 would not result in more free speech, it would not "hold Big Tech accountable," or whatever else people like Graham and these co-sponsers say repealing Section 230 would accomplish.

Please call your Senators and Representatives!

https://www.badinternetbills.com/

#Privacy #FreeSpeech #Censorship #Internet #DigitalRights #Section230 #US #UnitedStates

Khan discusses how the business model of the ad-driven internet drives harmful behavior. @pluralistic and #LinaKhan disagree about the role of #Section230 in exacerbating this issue. Khan discusses how 230 has shielded algorithmic feed curation and how it maybe doesn’t deserve the protection. Doctorow challenges that the issue isn’t 230 (which he says protects new entrants), but rather lack of privacy protections (which, tbf, Khan nods along to).

Khan discusses how the business model of the ad-driven internet drives harmful behavior. @pluralistic and #LinaKhan disagree about the role of #Section230 in exacerbating this issue. Khan discusses how 230 has shielded algorithmic feed curation and how it maybe doesn’t deserve the protection. Doctorow challenges that the issue isn’t 230 (which he says protects new entrants), but rather lack of privacy protections (which, tbf, Khan nods along to).

Is this slop created BY Meta?
If #Meta et al are using #AI to create unique, fictional content, then aren't they all publishers? They're only protected when publishing content from OTHER providers.

From #section230

(1/?)

@norightturnnz
> Will Labour take on the oligarchs?

I very much hope so, but David Parker is dead wrong when he says;

"... we in the west have made a fundamental error in providing what is in effect an exclusion of liability for third party content."

I suggest reading some of the pieces Mike Masnick has published in defence of #Section230, the US equivalent of the limited liability for third-party content that Parker proposes to abolish;

https://www.techdirt.com/tag/section-230/

#TechRegulation