Section 230 is outdated and needs to be removed lest political censors and social advocacy busybodies continue to abuse people online. There’s no more room for excuses. It’s obsolete.
Could you elaborate? It's not clear to me how removing section 230, making sites responsible for the content they host, would result in _less_ political censorship and abuse by "social advocacy busybodies".
Parent account's since been banned, but the "you cannot exercise any control at all over content or you'll lose CDA 230 protections" canard is false.
We’ll say it plainly here: there is no legal significance to labeling an online service a “platform” as opposed to a “publisher.” Yes. That’s right. There is no legal significance to labeling an online service a “platform.” Nor does the law treat online services differently based on their ideological “neutrality” or lack thereof. ... Rather than enshrine some significance between online “platforms” and “publishers,” Section 230 intentionally nullifies any distinction that might have existed. Contrary to popular misconception, immunity is not a reward for intermediaries that choose the path of total neutrality (whatever that means); nor did Congress enact Section 230 with an expectation that Internet services were or would become completely neutral. Section 230 explicitly grants immunity to all intermediaries, both the “neutral” and the proudly biased. It treats them exactly the same, and does so on purpose.
