Here a QRD for the criminally retarded before this thread spirals out of control:
>Common Decency Act, section 230 is a protection that allows “platforms” to be safe from litigation
>I.E. your ISP can’t be sued because someone sent CP over their fiber or YouTube can’t be sued if someone uploads Lord of the Rings
>they have to make a good faith effort to remove illegal content. Not editorialize content
>publishers, groups who editorialize and host content, are not protected under CDA 230
>social media companies claim to be platforms and exist in a special class of companies that cannot be sued
>despite claiming to be platforms, they actively prune content that is not illegal prompting question if they’re actually platforms.
>for instance you ISP isn’t actively filtering out hateful packets sent to your home
>flash forward to yesterday
>twitter and Facebook introduce “fact checkers” (known as editors in other industries) that alter posts by either obscuring them, deleting them or adding warnings
>doing the literal textbook definition of editorialization
>now the president is going to clarify what constitutes a platform and who deserves being protected from being sued
>this isn’t imposing speech on their private property. They have an option to be a platform or to not be a platform. Analogous to how private companies can opt into being a for profit or non profit company and are afforded different benefits under different rules.