Private companies can set their own policies for conducting business ... BUT ... they cannot violate the law in doing so.
Federal law --
18 USC 241: Conspiracy Against Rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Clearly, they are conspiring to deprive people of (and retaliate against people for exercising) their First Amendment rights to free speech and free press.
And then you have conflicting supreme court cases, even recently, like Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
Personally, I think companies should be shielded from government interference. IMHO, it's better to get off Twitter and Facebook in the first place. 230 helps every internet company with user generated content, whether it is alt tech, big tech, or tiny tech. Make too many changes to it, and you basically hurt the rest of us (including this web site for example).
Make it more costly to do business, well, it probably helps big tech the most since they can afford enough lawyers. I remember when the CDA was struck down in the first place, it was the first time much of the web had a blackout protest, I think you'd be surprised who joins in if 230 was in threat of a change.
This is more important than most realize.
Private companies can set their own policies for conducting business ... BUT ... they cannot violate the law in doing so.
Federal law --
18 USC 241: Conspiracy Against Rights
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241
Clearly, they are conspiring to deprive people of (and retaliate against people for exercising) their First Amendment rights to free speech and free press.
And then you have conflicting supreme court cases, even recently, like Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
Personally, I think companies should be shielded from government interference. IMHO, it's better to get off Twitter and Facebook in the first place. 230 helps every internet company with user generated content, whether it is alt tech, big tech, or tiny tech. Make too many changes to it, and you basically hurt the rest of us (including this web site for example).
Make it more costly to do business, well, it probably helps big tech the most since they can afford enough lawyers. I remember when the CDA was struck down in the first place, it was the first time much of the web had a blackout protest, I think you'd be surprised who joins in if 230 was in threat of a change.