The CEOs of Twitter, Facebook and Google are facing a grilling by GOP senators making unfounded allegations that the tech giants show anti-conservative bias. Their focus includes Section 230, a law relating to unfettered internet speech. (Oct. 28) AP Domestic

In 1996, Congress passed the Communications Decency Act, which fueled the rise of the modern internet and technology giants Facebook, Google and Twitter. And thatlaw contains a provision that has emerged as one of the nation's most hotly contested issues.

Section 230 allowed these companies to largely regulate themselves, shielding them from liability for much of the content their users post on their platforms, and granting companies legal immunity for good faith efforts to remove content that violates their policies.

The key part of the provisionsometimes called the "twenty-six words that created the internet" reads: No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

What that boils down to: Individual users canbe sued for content they post but generally the platformscannot, at least not successfully.

From COVID-19 to voter fraud:Trump is nation's single largest spreader of disinformation, studies say

'Who the hell elected you?'Tech CEOs accused of bias against Trump and conservatives days before election

There are exceptions such as federal crimes and intellectual property claims. Also, lawmakers in 2018 chipped away at Section 230 protections by passing a law that makes it easier to sue internet platforms that knowingly aid sex trafficking.

But broadly speaking, internet companies have wide latitude to decide what can stay on their platforms and what must come down. Internet platforms say they could not exist in their current form without these protections.

We have to get rid of Section 230, President Donald Trump said at a rally in Georgia on Monday night, referring to the horrendous tech giants. Or youre not going to have a country very long.

Democrats and Republicans agree that the nation's leading tech companies have becometoo powerfuland need tougher regulation. Both partiesare threatening to narrow or repeal Section 230.

Bottom line, they say, social media platforms should be held more accountable for how they police content. But their reasons are very different.

Democrats including president-elect Joe Biden have urged Congress to revise Section 230 to force tech companies to remove hate speech and extremism, election interference and falsehoods.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called Section 230 a giftto Big Tech. "It is not out of the question that that could be removed," she said in 2019.

Trump and many Republicans, on the other hand, accuse tech companies of censoring conservativesand limiting their reach on social media.

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey appears on a monitor behind a stenographer as he testifies remotely during the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing "Does Section 230's Sweeping Immunity Enable Big Tech Bad Behavior?" on Oct. 28.(Photo: Pool, Getty Images)

A number of bills to hold Facebook, Google and Twitter legally accountable for how they moderate content are circulating in Congress, includingthe EARN IT Actand the PACT Act.

However, Jeff Kosseff, an assistant professor of cybersecurity law in the United States Naval Academys Cyber Science Department, saysit would be challengingfor Congress to reach consensus on how to alter Section 230.

You have two competing views as to what platforms should be doing, Kosseff, author of The Twenty-Six Words That Created the Internet, told USA TODAY last year. Its hard to imagine what would satisfy everyone who is upset with the tech companies.

If Section 230 were repealed, he says we would see the platforms conduct more moderation, not less, because of the increased risk of their liability for content users' post.

Twitters Jack Dorsey and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg say their platforms strike a balance between promoting free expression and removing harmful content. They acknowledge making some enforcement errors but say their policies are applied fairly to everyone.

Both tech leaders say they're open to revising Section 230. Zuckerberg told lawmakers in November: "We would benefit from clearer guidance from elected officials."

Censorship or conspiracy theory?Trump supporters say Facebook and Twitter censor them but conservatives still rule socialmedia

Dorsey said the platforms should be more open with users about how content moderation decisions are made and should offer a straightforward way to appeal moderation decisions. Hed also like to see users be able to opt out of algorithms that determine what content they see on the platform.

Trumps attacks on Section 230 intensified in the final weeks of his re-election campaign as social media companies labeled or removed posts they deemed false or misleading or that could cause harm or incite violence.

Former Vice President Joe Biden and President Donald Trump are on opposite sides of the vote-by-mail issue.(Photo: AP)

If anything, the attacks intensified after the election as social media companies flagged the presidents allegations of election rigging and voter fraud. Trump also tried to repeal Section 230 through the National Defense Authorization Act.

Charges of anti-conservative bias raged before the presidential election when Facebook and Twitter limited the spread of a New York Post article about Bidens son Hunter, which cited unverified emails reportedly uncovered by allies of Trump.

Zuckerberg said Facebook throttled the story while it was being fact-checked after warnings from the FBI to be on "heightened alert" about "hack and leak operations" in the final days before the 2020 election.

Twitter initially blocked links to the article, saying the links included peoples personal information and relied on hacked materials, both violations of its policies, but then reversed itself.

Conservatives have complained for years that social media companies silence the political speech of right-leaning users.

Nine in 10 Republicans and independents who lean toward the Republican Party say its at least somewhat likely that social media platforms censor political viewpoints they find objectionable, up slightly from 85% in 2018, according to an August report from the Pew Research Center.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law on Online Platforms and Market Power in the Rayburn House office Building, July 29, 2020 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.(Photo: Pool, Getty Images)

Researchers have found no evidence to support GOP grievances that conservative voices are squelched. Rather, they say social media algorithms dont have a political affiliation or party but instead favor content that elicits strong reactions from users. What's more, studies consistently show that conservative voices and viewpoints dominate the conversation on these platforms.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2021/01/04/trump-biden-pelosi-section-230-repeal-facebook-twitter-google/4132529001/

Follow this link:

Donald Trump and Joe Biden vs. Facebook and Twitter: Why Section 230 could get repealed in 2021 - USA TODAY