Youtube would just purge non verified or non mainstream channels. It’s the perfect excuse to remove the rabble rousing progressive and maga factions. They would only allow sanitized corporate propaganda.
230 doesn't cover only political speech. Removing 230 means every drama channel can sue YouTube because someone said something catty about them. Half of YouTube is drama channels.
230 isn't about content, directly. **It's protection from being sued over content. ** With no 230 protections, YouTube can be sued for every single video on their system, and every single comment.
This holds true for every forum, every image site, everything. If third parties can post to it, they're liable for everything on it. Imagine what happens to gossip sites like TMZ. It's an untenable solution because it shuts down all discussion on the internet. I read a discussion that removing 230 could potentially allow people to sue Yelp, for bad reviews of their company.
But we don't care about the drama channels, and TMZ still broadcasts on platforms outside of YouTube. I'm not saying keep 230 with it's current interpretation, but some form of 230 is absolutely necessary. Trump ordering the FCC to redefine their interpretation of 230 would do a ton of good. I'm not disagreeing with what you say but rather adding some additional considerations to your analysis.
Youtube would just purge non verified or non mainstream channels. It’s the perfect excuse to remove the rabble rousing progressive and maga factions. They would only allow sanitized corporate propaganda.
230 doesn't cover only political speech. Removing 230 means every drama channel can sue YouTube because someone said something catty about them. Half of YouTube is drama channels.
230 isn't about content, directly. **It's protection from being sued over content. ** With no 230 protections, YouTube can be sued for every single video on their system, and every single comment.
This holds true for every forum, every image site, everything. If third parties can post to it, they're liable for everything on it. Imagine what happens to gossip sites like TMZ. It's an untenable solution because it shuts down all discussion on the internet. I read a discussion that removing 230 could potentially allow people to sue Yelp, for bad reviews of their company.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230
Revise/reform, not repeal. Only repeal if they have something new to take it's place immediately.
But we don't care about the drama channels, and TMZ still broadcasts on platforms outside of YouTube. I'm not saying keep 230 with it's current interpretation, but some form of 230 is absolutely necessary. Trump ordering the FCC to redefine their interpretation of 230 would do a ton of good. I'm not disagreeing with what you say but rather adding some additional considerations to your analysis.
You don't have to care about drama channels, it's just an example of how far removing 230 spreads. I'm glad you agree, and see it.