Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Lorraine Evanoff's avatar

Armando, you are 100% correct to be alarmed.

The whole approach by these open forum platforms, including Reddit and Twitter, to allow users to "self regulate" seems intended to not pierce the veil of Section 230 that "embodies that principle that we should all be responsible for our own actions and statements online, but generally not those of others. The law prevents most civil suits against users or services that are based on what others say."

That means Section 230 preserves these sites as "open forums" or "open marketplaces" where the owners of the marketplace are not responsible for actions of its customers i.e. users.

Trying to regulate customers or users puts the protections provided by Section 230 at risk.

That said, just like any open marketplace or open forum, where anyone is allowed their "soapbox," if someone is a threat to themselves and/or others, the marketplace should have an obligation to report the danger to authorities.

The fact that Substack's algorithms failed to pick up on this post and the threat of self immolation by the user seems irresponsible. But it's no illegal.

Just like abolishing the "Fairness doctrine" by the FCC, it's a slippery slope that can be a double edged sword.

Expand full comment
Diane’s Blue Forum 👩‍💻's avatar

Thanks—I wasn’t aware of the issue, but I agree Substack needs some self-regulation on several fronts.

Expand full comment
21 more comments...

No posts