Irish YJ
Southsida
- Messages
- 25,888
- Reaction score
- 1,444
I think you're underestimating what will happen if Section 230 is repealed. There are hundreds of "activists" that Twitter would be forced to ban overnight. For example, literally anyone participating in #StopTheSteal which has led to death threats against poll workers, technicians, and election officials would have to be banned by Twitter less Twitter get sued over the consequences of permitting their speech on their platform. All companies will look to cover their asses and err on the side of caution which means bans and ubiquitous censorship of any topic their lawyers feel gives them exposure. Is there comparable content on the left right now? The closest thing would be ANTIFA + property destruction.
People like Ben Shapiro, who don't push libelous or dangerous talking points, will be fine regardless of what happens with Section 230. Marjorie Taylor Greene will not. There are a lot more of her than there are of Ben. You will see widespread deplatforming of right wing social media accounts without Section 230... and worse, there will be no option to form an alternative (e.g. Parler) because the alternative would get sued and shut down as soon as they moved there.
Lax, I am 1000% OK with deplatforming as many right or left wing nuts as possible. It wouldn't just be anitfa. I think you underestimate (or simply overlook) the numbers on the left accepting, excusing, and promoting illegal activity. BLM does plenty of that too. They can take Shapiro, Hannity, Maddow, Fredo, etc.. wouldn't bother me one tiny bit.
The best thing to come out of it, there would be less crazy (both sides). So we'd be limited to the occasional in person protest of crazies, instead of being overwhelmed with them on SM daily.
Perhaps they'd be nice enough to drop the hammer on unsubstantiated claims like "Hunter's laptop and emails are Russian disinformation".