Jessica Guynn, USA TODAY
Published 7:18 p.m. ET Oct. 15, 2020 | Updated 8:00 p.m. ET Oct. 15, 2020
NBC agreed to host President Donald Trump after he was administered a COVID-19 test by the National Institutes of Health.
What is Section 230?
The Communications Decency Act is an obscure law passed by Congress in 1996 that has profoundly shaped today’s internet.
A provision of that law is what’s so hotly contested. Section 230 was intended to protect free expression on the internet by shielding internet companies from liability for much of the content their users post on their platforms and granting companies legal immunity for good faith efforts to remove content.
That provision helped fuel the rise of the modern internet. Companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google-owned YouTube say they could not exist in their current form without its protections.
There are exceptions to the law, such as federal crimes and intellectual property claims. Also in 2018, lawmakers chipped away at Section 230 protections by passing a law that makes it easier to sue internet platforms that knowingly aid sex trafficking.
But generally speaking, internet companies have broad latitude to decide what can stay on their platforms and what must come down.
Why does Trump hate Section 230?
Section 230 has critics on both sides of the aisle. Democrats and Republicans generally agree that social media platforms should be held more accountable for how they police content, and they’ve introduced a number of bills, none of which have gained traction on Capitol Hill.
Democrats including presidential nominee Joe Biden have urged Congress to revise Section 230 to make tech companies more accountable for hate speech and extremism, election interference, misinformation and disinformation.
‘It’s already having a massive effect’: Corporate America demands Trump rescind executive order on diversity training
Republican critics accuse tech companies of censoring conservatives and limiting their reach on social media. There is no clear evidence to support those claims, which tech companies deny.
President Trump and his surrogates have been the loudest critics of Section 230. Trump has repeatedly called on Congress to repeal it. The Justice Department has asked Congress to adopt a new law that would hold Facebook, Google and Twitter legally accountable for how they moderate content.
Trump’s attacks on Section 230 have intensified in the final weeks of his re-election campaign as social media companies label or remove posts they deem false or misleading or that could cause harm or incite violence.
What does this have to do with Hunter Biden?
Charges of anti-conservative bias raged again this week when Facebook and Twitter limited access to a dubious article about Biden and his son Hunter.
Facebook said it slowed the spread of the article to fact-check its claims. Twitter said it blocked the article because it included people’s personal information and relied on hacked materials, both violations of its policies.
With the presidential election just weeks away, social media companies are moving aggressively to remove misinformation that could sway voters or tilt the election.
“(Biden) and his family are crooked, and they got caught. And now they are being protected by Big Tech,” Trump said Thursday. “We must immediately strip them of their Section 230 protection.”
What’s the latest? Clarence Thomas, FCC
On Thursday, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai said he has the legal authority to interpret Section 230 and plans to set new rules that “clarify” its scope.
The Commerce Department asked the FCC to look into “ambiguities” in Section 230 after Trump issued an executive order in May. That executive order came after Twitter put fact-check labels on his tweets for the first time.
The FCC’s two Democratic commissioners, Geoffrey Starks and Jessica Rosenworcel, challenged Pai’s decision. The Internet Association, an industry group, also criticized Pai. “The First Amendment protects every private enterprise’s ability to set and enforce rules for acceptable content on their services,” Deputy General Counsel Elizabeth Banker said in a statement.
Earlier this week, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said lower courts have interpreted Section 230 too broadly, giving internet companies “sweeping protections” that were not intended by the statute.
Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/10/15/trump-section-230-facebook-twitter-google-conservative-bias/3670858001/