This is to punish companies that don’t punish conservatives.
Notice how they only (partially) fix this in order to put continued pressure on big tech to censor even more?
They don’t actually address the issue of unfair censorship or the fact that big tech has been getting best of both worlds, which is protection from liability for content what is published, yet editorial control (and censorship) over what is published.
So congress only makes the move that limits people’s speech. It doesn’t make the move that limits the breadth of reach and power that big tech has.
So we are going to codify suppression of ‘wrongthink’?
Republicans did nothing when they had the chance and I am supposed to believe democrats will protect my rights online?
Cue Graham & Lee matching out to tell us how this is ‘the best they could do’...
I’m just glad I have no children.
Section 230 currently protects Free Republic from being liable for the content of posts by users. Be vary wary of changes that don’t affect the big leftist mega-corps like Twitter and Facebook, but would allow smaller sites to be sued out of existence by activists.
Anything that Mark Warner, Mazie Hirono and Amy Klobuchar say is the reason for their bill, you can believe it is just the opposite. None of these three have any ethics, honesty or character.
al-reuters conveniently omitted...
...by BLM/ANTIFA terrorists...
Should be a binary operation. Either you:
1) censor your users content and are therefore responsible for the content that you allow
-or-
2) you don’t censor and you are not responsible for the content
Traitorous scum.
So, this summary sounds like it is going in precisely the wrong direction.