|"Sorry, but thems the breaks." - Indeed. File under: Be careful what you wish for.|
Posted by: TEEBONE ® |
Author Profile Mail author Edit
Why ALL Section 230 Reform Measures May Hurt Gun Rights
Earlier this week, Cam wrote about an attempt to shut down sites like Armslist. The attack seeks to use reform of Second 230, something conservatives have been clamoring for a lot in recent months/years.
See, the issue is that Section 230 provides protections to sites like Facebook and Twitter, permitting them to not be held liable for what happens on their sites. You can’t sue Facebook because someone says something mean to you, after all.
Feinstein’s bill seeks to undo that part of 230 to attack gun sites like Armslist.
However, as Gabby Hoffman points out in a new column, it’s important to remember that Section 230 reform that many people want may go further than that.
See, what this all plays into is something I love talking about: The Law of Unintended Consequences.
Let’s say many on the right get what they want. They get Second 230 repealed and can now hammer Twitter and Facebook for their bias.
As author Gabriella Hoffman notes, if that happens, Armslist loses its Section 230 protections as well. Once that happens, it’s game over for Armslist and any other site where people might sell a gun.
And you’re deluding yourself if you think just beating Feinstein’s bill would be sufficient to stop that from happening. Any Section 230 repeal will yield similar results.
Sorry, but thems the breaks.
If you want to force fairness from Facebook or Twitter, you’re going to have to take an alternate approach. You’re going to have to make it too costly for them to be biased.
Section 230 reform isn’t likely the approach any of us really want to take.
|Post Reply | Recommend | Alert||Previous | Next | Current page|