you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You can certainly require these publishers to keep their published content legal. If they can’t manage that then they are free to allow all content.

Abolishing section 230 is a glowjogger’s take.

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that you think the government can make platforms like twitter keep their content up?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Law can define a platform as allowing all views.

Then, a company is free to be a platform protected under 230 or it can choose to forfeit its protection by censoring and discriminating against people.

I for one look forward to seeing Jack Dorsey in a jail cell next to El Chapo’s next time the feds find him publishing drug trading deals, murders, scams or other crimes on his web site.

Of course that would require dealing with the dozens of prevaricating judges that are conspiring with these companies to break the Law as it is today first.