You’ve probably heard a lot of talk from politicians and pundits about why we need to make changes (or not make changes) to something called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which mainly involves content monitoring. Knee jerk reactions aside, most people probably don’t have a full understanding of what Section 230 is and what it does.  So, we thought we would put together a hopefully neutral and unbiased overview of Section 230, just to help people get an understanding of it.

What is Section 230?

Way back in 1996, when the internet was really just gaining real traction in the mainstream, Congress passed the Communications Decency Act, to regulate online pornography. One section of that Act (Section 230) effectively shields internet service providers and users from liability for content they host online. The section further stipulates that an interactive computer service provider or user may not be treated as the publisher of information provided by another information content provider. 

OK, but what does that all mean?

Essentially, Section 230 says that ‘internet service providers’ aren’t responsible for content that is posted by users. Over time, the term ‘internet service providers’ has come to cover websites and social media platforms, among other internet-related companies and services. 

By freeing the company from liability for content monitoring those companies were more easily able to scale their user bases and overall businesses. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and a host of other companies were able to grow so quickly and gain so much success, at least partly due to this release from liability for what users post on their sites or apps.

What about Before Section 230?

Prior to Section 230, internet service providers were in fact expected to monitor and be held responsible for everything that happens on their sites, even if something was done by a user outside of their control. 

This meant that every online forum or message board (other than very specific types of content which were already exempt) either had to read every post prior to publishing or risk legal repercussions if a use posted something illegal. For many companies during this time, it was easier just to exclude user-generated content (like comments, etc.) from their websites or services, simply to avoid issues with an essentially uncontrollable outside element. 

​​OK, so What’s all the Fuss About?

Critics of Section 230 come from all parts of the political spectrum but tend to focus on different aspects. Some critics are concerned that big tech companies use Section 230 to hide their motives and agendas (perhaps political) in deciding what content to moderate or remove and what to allow to flourish on their sites. Other critics focus on the sites’ lack of moderation of false or potentially dangerous content, by falling back on the protections of Section 230. While the reasons may differ, politicians from both sides of the aisle have criticized Section 230 for years. 

So, what if Congress Repealed Section 230?

This is very much up for debate, with people offering vastly different opinions about the impact of no longer have Section 230 in place. However, many experts agree that it would make it more difficult for startup companies and new tech businesses to enter the online marketplace. The existing companies would be best positioned to adapt and maintain their leadership within their industries and markets. 

Is there a possible middle ground?

When both sides of the political universe share a similar aim, there is always the potential for movement. But, could the sides agree on some sort of alteration to Section 230 that would appeal to each group?

We wouldn’t want to speculate on what a compromise or bi-partisan update to Section 230 might look like. But, changes might involve increasing content monitoring requirements for internet service providers regarding certain topics or types of content. Some illegal content is already sectioned off where companies are required to monitor for content that breaks various laws and remove it immediately if/when they find it.

So, perhaps this aspect could be broadened. There might also be some changes to require guidelines for user disqualification to be more specifically spelled out and adhered to. These are just a few ideas of what Congress might consider in the months ahead as they look at Section 230.