Technically you all need to remember the section 230 gives immunity to the press, they can pick any side they want they can help any side win any election, pretty much they can secretly commit treason without being punished. Which is why its called "fake news" because its a one sided organisation, that is controlled from the top by people with a big agenda to overthrow united states.
As long as 230 exists they feel safe about what they say. Trust me, as soon as 230 gets nuked, and if trump gets 4 more years, the media will INSTANTLY change their narrative saying how good trump is.
230 has nothing to do with the news media. They are already protected under the first amendment. Media can have whatever viewpoint and publish whatever garbage they want and, so long as it isn't libel or slander, they are entirely within their rights to do so. Those laws could stand to be strengthened, but it's really something that needs to be worked out in the marketplace.
230 is specific to the internet. It protects websites from liabilities associated with their users' speech, which serves an important purpose but it's being abused by big tech. The issue is that they claim to be platforms when it suits their purposes (for liability protection) and publishers when it suits their purposes in others (censoring). It's 25 year old law that predates social networking and just needs to be updated, really.
But, no, fake news doesn't go away with 230 should it be repealed.
Technically you all need to remember the section 230 gives immunity to the press, they can pick any side they want they can help any side win any election, pretty much they can secretly commit treason without being punished. Which is why its called "fake news" because its a one sided organisation, that is controlled from the top by people with a big agenda to overthrow united states.
As long as 230 exists they feel safe about what they say. Trust me, as soon as 230 gets nuked, and if trump gets 4 more years, the media will INSTANTLY change their narrative saying how good trump is.
Just watch.
230 has nothing to do with the news media. They are already protected under the first amendment. Media can have whatever viewpoint and publish whatever garbage they want and, so long as it isn't libel or slander, they are entirely within their rights to do so. Those laws could stand to be strengthened, but it's really something that needs to be worked out in the marketplace.
230 is specific to the internet. It protects websites from liabilities associated with their users' speech, which serves an important purpose but it's being abused by big tech. The issue is that they claim to be platforms when it suits their purposes (for liability protection) and publishers when it suits their purposes in others (censoring). It's 25 year old law that predates social networking and just needs to be updated, really.
But, no, fake news doesn't go away with 230 should it be repealed.