I think whenever I see a headline or a person making some claim about #section230 the first reaction needs to be, "Okay, section 230 of what? What do you think that refers to?"
So many people have no idea what section 230 actually says, or does, but at least this response would help weed out the most uninformed of the people spouting out about it.
@LouisIngenthron I'd say that kind of proves my point. S230 exists outside of the CDA, and if I ask my question, "S230 of what?" then CDA is not the correct answer, and shows a misunderstanding of the state of play.
I also don't think asking a trick question would help anything.
@volkris Lol, and "what now-nonexistent piece of legislation is this a part of?" isn't a trick question?
At least my question gets at the heart of how it works instead of asking about administrative trivia.
@LouisIngenthron this question of regulation of internet activity is an administrative question!
And if a person doesn't know how the administration works, then they're in no position to judge or modify the administration.
That's the point: asking what it's a section of is a great way of putting a point on whether the person has the most basic familiarity with the thing they wish to attack and change.
So many don't.
@volkris Why, though? The CDA basically doesn't exist anymore. That's like asking somebody about the League of Nations to gauge their knowledge of the UN.
Imo, the better question is: "What line do you think S230 draws between platforms and publishers?" Then, when they respond, you can point out that the word "platform" never appears in the law.