Supreme Court and Section 230
Social media has become the new leaders on the internet. Across the world, billions of people use and rely on social media for news, entertainment, or to express their thoughts and emotions. Unlike other media platforms such as television and the newspaper, digital medias platforms have different laws within them. Many of these laws are specific towards the first amendment and the idea of freedom of speech. Certain things are still the same within the different media outlets such as incitement which would be trying to provoke unlawful intentions or try to cause danger through your words. With the quick advancements of technology and digital media platforms, these laws have come to question as people in a way have been taking advantage of these free speech platforms. People have begun to discuss change within laws surrounding digital media platforms and have continued to push these laws all the way to the supreme court.
In 1996, Section 230 was enacted to protect technology platforms against its users. In simple terms, Section 230 discusses the concept that these tech platforms cannot be help reliable for the words posted by the user. For example, if someone was on Facebook and started to post about causing a riot, or using harmful speech, the media platform would not be held responsible for this but instead the user who posted these things would be at fault. With Section 230, this has protected large tech companies and platforms from people trying to cause harm both in a physical sense and verbally abusive. Since 1996, Section 230 has held strong but recently, the Supreme Court has taken on Section 230to discuss its impact and to see if tech companies need to take more responsibility. With Section 230 in place, tech companies do not have to have as strong regulations within their platforms and can allow users to say for the most part whatever they want. With the Supreme Court, the decision on hand is if the power of Section 230 should be weakened to hold these platforms more reliable. For example, for the most part people can say most things on Twitter, but if the Supreme Court decides to weaken Section 230, this will mean Twitter would become more responsible for its users’ content and therefor would have to regulate content much more in depth. As of right now, the internet is a free usage platform for everyone to use and express their thoughts and opinions. If Section 230 is weakened and companies start enforcing new rules on their planforms, this idea of the internet being free would be lost as some free speech rights would be taken away on these platforms. Yes, some types of speech are unimaginable and awful to people such as hate speech or stating very biased opinions. But, if it is not inciting violence or going against the first amendment, it is considered protected under the first amendment. This is how tech and media platforms have run their businesses. People can have their first amendment rights but if their speech goes against the first amendment, it is on the user and not the company. This is q very important case being held both for these tech companies as well as us as users. No matter what side of this case you are rooting for, the conversation has begun and even after this case I believe the conversation will continue on people trying to find ways to hold these tech companies more responsible for the content on their platforms.
The Supreme Court looking at Section 230 currently is due to the vast amount of hurtful and flat-out bad media you can find on media platforms. The question at stake is should these companies be reliable for the content posted on the media platforms. But, with doing so these large platforms would not be “free” spaces to digitally speak your opinions as the new regulations would take away some of your so called first amendment rights. Social media platforms would become more like television and newspaper with regulations rather than if you spoke in public with your own voice. Section 230 has begun the rounds of conversation and will continue to do so until the Supreme Court can decide whether Section 230 should have some of its power taken away or if it should stay the same.
