this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
65 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

81757 readers
3246 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
65
Push to repeal Section 230 raises stakes for how social media moderates content (foxbaltimore.com)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by Cantaloupe877@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

This is section 230, and for years it made it so that platforms aren’t directly responsible for what their users do. Repealing it would in a way mandate moderating each and every post for any potential risk for a lawsuit. The companies with the resources to do that will do that, those without will struggle.

There’s a push to repeal or weaken Section 230. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/3546/text https://www.durbin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/durbin-graham-introduce-bill-to-sunset-section-230-immunity-for-tech-companies-protect-americans-online

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Keep section 230. Treat any service that uses recommendation or engagement algorithms as publishers.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 5 points 1 week ago

If they use the data for any purpose other than displaying results for users they need to be treated as publishers.

Sell to advertisers? Publisher. Use for own advertising? Publisher. Sell to AI companies? Publisher.

[–] hamsterkill 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The more likely result from removing 230 (depending on how it was removed) is actually that all moderation stops. Moderation is what makes the companies liable without 230, so they just wouldn't do it (and wouldn't allow users to do it either). Any open community site would quickly become a cesspool. Small private closed communities would become the norm.

[–] r0ertel@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

You could be right, but I read an opinion piece a while back that suggested that removal of 230 would allow the government to indirectly censor speech online by selectively punishing the platforms that don't moderate in the way that the administration would like. This may not be a problem under the current administration, but what if a wanabe dictator were to somehow become president?

[–] tomatolung@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Worth reading on the background of 230 https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2026/02/30-years-of-section-230-why-we-still-need-it-for-a-safer-internet/