https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7808/text

On the whole it is a tiny bill, just makes a few changes.

This part:

(1) in the heading, by striking “And Screening Of Offensive Material” and inserting “Of Unlawful Or Objectionable Material”; and

Is useless. It does nothing. Replacing "Offensive" with "Objectionable." But it's just the title and shouldn't actually effect anything anyway, so might just be a meh.

This is good:

(2) in paragraph (2)—

(A) in subparagraph (A)—

(i) by striking “or otherwise objectionable” and inserting “, unlawful, or that promotes violence or terrorism”; and

That directly addresses the problem area and the loophole would be gone. But then...

(C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

“(C) any action taken to provide users with the option to restrict access to any other material, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.”.

Wait a minute now. That is a whole new can of obfuscated loopholery.

It could easily classify pretty much everything any forum like thedonald does as being a publisher. NSFW tags and filters? Blocking people? Deporting people? Removing porn? Unless it's actually unlawful, we would lose the ability to remove or moderate anything or lose the very protection everyone is afraid of losing if 230 was repealed.

I assume this is written to stop things like reddit allowing "user" moderators to do the censoring for them. And to prevent facebook and twitter from simply offering a "safe and filtered" option. But it looks to me like it will destroy sec230 protection for the little guys as well so what is the point of even keeping it?