FIXING SECTION 230:

AN EXAMINATION OF PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS

The Alliance to Counter Crime Online teamed up with the journals American Prospect and American Affairs to host a bipartisan series of free, virtual panels. The four panels examined flaws in today’s application of Section 230 and considered suggestions for fixing the provision. The panels featured discussions with policy and technology experts, as well as individuals who have been impacted by platforms’ failure to curb unlawful activity on their services. Each panel closed with a Q-&-A session.

The Real Story Behind Section 230: A View From Those Who Were There

When CDA230 was adopted into law in 1996, only about 20M Americans had regular access to the Internet, and most logged on using a telephone modem. Smart phones, social media and the algorithms that power today’s global platforms hadn’t been invented. This panel will examine the origins and original intent of CDA230, reveal how early tech giants responded to public safety issues in the early days, and illuminate how judicial interpretations of the law skewed its original intent, leading us to where we are today.

Opening Remarks: Chair Frank Pallone and Ranking Member Cathy McMorris Rodgers, House Energy and Commerce Committee

Moderator: Rick Lane, Founder, Iggy Ventures LLC

Panelists

Harmed By Section 230: Barring Access to the Courtroom

Section 230 was intended as “a sword and a shield” that would allow tech firms to moderate harmful and illegal content without fear of liability. Unfortunately, as applied by the courts, the 26-word provision has had the opposite effect. Judicial rulings have provided online platforms almost total immunity from any harmful behavior, including cases when the platforms don’t moderate content at all, when they know about the harmful activity, and even when they build business models around it and profit from it. Ordinarily, brick-and-mortar businesses can be held culpable if their irresponsible action or product results in one of their customers harming another customer or the public. But Section 230 has effectively blocked a path to justice for people and businesses harmed by online illicit content. This panel will hear from ordinary Americans locked in a struggle for justice.

Opening Remarks: Representative Gus Bilirakis

Moderator: Carrie Goldberg, Victim’s Rights Attorney

Panelists

Tech Possibilities: Reshaping a Misinformed Debate

To hear members of the tech industry tell it, reforming Section 230 will mean the end of the Internet as we know it, and the death of free expression. Big Tech executives also claim to be working hard to address toxic content on their platforms, often saying they just need more time to get their Artificial Intelligence tools working better. This panel will examine the veracity of those claims, describe existing technologies and coding practices that could restrict or remove a host of illicit content, and discuss how addressing toxic and illicit content on web platforms is a policy question, not a technical one.

Moderator: Julius Krein, Editor, American Affairs

Panelists

Fixing Section 230: Protecting the Public While Promoting Free Expression

There's no doubt that Section 230 plays an important role in the structure of the Internet. But the 26-word provision faces calls for amendment to address the fact that online platforms have no legal incentive to curb illicit and toxic content, and harmed individuals have no recourse in court. The panelists in this session will outline the original goals of Section 230, the problems that have arisen as a result of court interpretation, and proposals for revising the provision.

Opening Remarks: Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky and Congressman Bob Latta

Moderator: David Dayen, Executive Editor, The American Prospect

Panelists