LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Facebook, Twitter and Google chief executives faced more than three and a half hours of questions from U.S. senators on Wednesday. Currently, companies cannot sue what users post online or for their decisions about leaving and deleting.Some politicians have raised this concern.But top executives said they needed the law to be able to moderate its content.Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter's Jack Dorsey and Google's Sundar Pichai were called before the Senate after both Democrats and Republicans agreed to call them to investigate.
'Vulnerability'
Senators are concerned about joker censorship and the spread of misinformation.And some industry watchers agree that the law, called Section 230, needs to be reviewed again.[It] allows digital businesses to allow people to post things on the fly. But it is not responsible for the consequences, even if it expands or reduces that speech, ”Prof Fiona Scott Morton of Yale University told the BBC's Tech Tent podcast.
That's a huge publishing duty and newspapers have very different responsibilities.So we have a few loopholes that I think are bad for our society.When the trial began, Zuckerberg disappeared, unable to connect with the committee meeting, called Republican Senator Roger Vickers. "The most interesting development"But after a brief break, Zuckerberg told politicians he supported the rule change. "To make sure it works"
What is Section 230?
Section 230 is the primary legal safeguard against prosecuted social networks.This means that the website is generally not responsible for any illegal or offensive stuff that users post on these websites.They are more treated as neutral mediators as newspaper sellers than editors who decide what to do on paper.Originally seen as a means of protecting ISPs like BT or Comcast, it has become the primary shield for large websites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, where every post from users cannot be censored before they are published.
But politicians say Section 230 is out of date.
Democrats have had problems with the spread of lies online without affecting the website.Republicans say big tech is using moderation powers to censor dissent - making editorial calls rather than neutral.And both parties admitted that they wanted to see social networks in charge.
Gray lines present
It is the most important law protecting Internet speech," Dorsey told the Committee on Section 230 and that the repeal "will remove speech from the Internet".But he found himself faced with a series of questions about Twitter's policy action on what it was to delete or mislabel.When asked why Twitter labeled US President Donald Trump's posts on the security of mailing ballots. But left a post by Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei threatening to violence against Israel without labeling, Mr Dorsey replied that the Iranian leader's tweet was considered a "unabashed". "Rattling sword", which does not violate the terms of service
Mr Dorsey also found himself facing questions from Republican Senators about restricting Twitter's New York Post articles about Joe Biden's son.The New York Post is not just random men's tweets," said Republican Ted Cruz.Who chooses you and who is responsible for what media is allowed to report and what Americans are allowed to hear?
Meanwhile, Mr. Zuckerberg revealed. A "private meeting" with the FBI has warned companies to beware of leaking content.He said Facebook and he "fictitious" other companies have been warned about. "The hacks and leaks that could happen in the days or weeks leading up to this election.The FBI "advised us to be vigilant and highly sensitive if documents were found, we should look at it with suspicion it might be part of foreign management efforts," he said.
In Section 230, Mr. Zuckerberg told the Committee on Section 230 to support free expression and "Help build the Internet as we know it"But he added: `` The internet is evolving too.And I think Congress should revise the law to make sure it works as intended.Mr. Pichai, despite fiercely defending the law Our ability to provide access to a wide variety of information is only possible because of existing legal frameworks such as Section 230," he said.The United States adopted Section 230 in the early history of the Internet.And it is the basis for our leadership in the technology sector"
'Political ploy'
Both President Trump and his election rival Joe Biden demanded Section 230 be removed, albeit for different reasons.But some Democrats have taken time to criticize the entire ruling, placing their positions close to the election as a political scam.I've been a real supporter of Section 230 reform for 15 years,” senator Richard Blumenthal told the committee, referring to his time as attorney general.
But frankly, I was shocked that my Republican colleagues were literally holding this ruling a few days before the election when it seemed they wanted to bully and make the platform. Here, focus on the behavior of President Trump.Time seems inexplicable"Brian Schatz, his colleague, declined to ask any of the three chief executives' questions "because this is nonsense," said: "What happened here is the scars of this committee and the US Senate.
Reply With Quote
