Why the internet’s most important law exists and how people are still getting it wrong
The author of a new book on Section 230 says it doesn’t matter if you’re a publisher or a platform…..see more…..
“To really understand Section 230, you have to go all the way back to the 1950s. There was a Los Angeles ordinance that said if you have obscene material in your store, you can be held criminally responsible. So a vice officer sees this erotic book that he believes is obscene. Eleazar Smith, who owns the store, is prosecuted, and he’s sentenced to 30 days in jail.
This goes all the way up to the Supreme Court, and what the Supreme Court says is that the Los Angeles ordinance is unconstitutional. There’s absolutely no way that a distributor like a bookstore could review every bit of content before they sell it. So if you’re a distributor, you’re going to be liable only if you knew, or should have known, that what you’re distributing is illegal.“
I really like this piece….. It explains all was all working fine until the publishers like Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook decided to become censors for what people write. Also publications like the Mail, Express or perhaps that extremely liberal very woke and absolutely biased Huffington Post………
Nothing bad in that you say, which I think all would agree but……. All of these sites I have been banned from more than once…… No profanity, no nastiness but I do not conform to what woke says I should be! I suppose you may call me traditional.
If you are going to sensor anything you must sensor everything…. that….is the fundamental point…….. either censor all or nothing….. but fairly!
All the woke sites have censored what is fundamentally Conservative sites and people banned on the basis of how many other complain (woke internet warriors)
Its true that sites like Infowars are extreme views…… but it it hate or freedom of speech? and if they should have all their material taken down what of……………