Mary Anne Franks dumping on 230 as a special protection for an “industry,” which is importantly misleading. It protects a category of conduct—for businesses AND users—not just “social media companies."
I keep hearing bizarre claims like “well, newspapers don’t get 230 protection.” But every newspaper that allows user comments on articles relies on 230. So does every individual with a blog or YouTube channel or e-mail listserv.
Individuals with e-mail lists & YouTube channels are less attractive litigation targets than deep-pocketed technology companies, of course. But they’d also be a hell of a lot easier to bully.
One of the very earliest Section 230 cases (Batzel) involved liability, not for some massive platform, but for one guy, Ton Cremers, a museum security director who ran a small e-mail list about art theft in his spare time.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
