Stream your PBS favorites with the PBS app: https://to.pbs.org/2Jb8twGFind more from PBS NewsHour at https://www.pbs.org/newshourSubscribe to our YouTube cha...
They barely even need to alter Section 230. What they need to do is actually enforce it.
The protections Section 230 gives to websites are lost when the website fails to act. These websites have failed to act - as demonstrated by the people who gave their accounts of what happened at the start of the video. The websites can be sued, they can be penalised, but that isn’t happening.
The government won’t admit they also have responsibility for the failures here. Instead, they’re turning this into an opportunity to repeal legislation that is essential to how the internet functions, all so that they can better control the narratives online.
Yea, makes sense, but if it is law already, it should already have been possible to sue these giants: class-action lawsuits that haven’t been brought forward for some reason.
Yes I’m not sure why either. It could simply be that no one has brought forward a case, as legal action is expensive and complicated, which can be very daunting and off-putting. It could also be that a judge has ruled and thus established case law that says their Section 230 protection stands - in which case the government should amend the law to more clearly define where the limits are.
Ffs, I didn’t realise this was about the whole “repeal section 230, think of the children!!”
Well, the threat was made, let’s see if they follow through and what final shape that takes.
They barely even need to alter Section 230. What they need to do is actually enforce it.
The protections Section 230 gives to websites are lost when the website fails to act. These websites have failed to act - as demonstrated by the people who gave their accounts of what happened at the start of the video. The websites can be sued, they can be penalised, but that isn’t happening.
The government won’t admit they also have responsibility for the failures here. Instead, they’re turning this into an opportunity to repeal legislation that is essential to how the internet functions, all so that they can better control the narratives online.
Yea, makes sense, but if it is law already, it should already have been possible to sue these giants: class-action lawsuits that haven’t been brought forward for some reason.
Yes I’m not sure why either. It could simply be that no one has brought forward a case, as legal action is expensive and complicated, which can be very daunting and off-putting. It could also be that a judge has ruled and thus established case law that says their Section 230 protection stands - in which case the government should amend the law to more clearly define where the limits are.