Creating a special fast-track arbitration system for countering social media speech which is considered false, defamatory or otherwise worthy of some warning label could provide recourse without forcing social media platforms to become 'arbiters of truth,' while protecting liability protections afforded by Section 230 of the CDA, argues Tom Rogers, the former Senior Counsel to the US House of Representatives Telecommunications Subcommittee.
The debate is complicated by a legal statute, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which exempts internet platforms from liability for third-party speech – speech that they did not generate directly. Therefore, no matter how false or defamatory a post on their platforms may be, the likes of Twitter and Facebook cannot be held legally liable.
The premise is all views can be "aired" but all views are subject to AIRing — that is, "Arbitration Independent Review." The speaker and the disputing party would each choose an arbitrator, and just like in any other arbitration proceeding, those two arbitrators would pick a third independent arbitrator.
Since an objectionable tweet by someone as controversial as President Trump would have many complaining parties coming from many different directions, each post or tweet would be subject to only a single AIR proceeding. If a speaker ended up with three adverse rulings within a 12-month period they would lose their account speaking privileges on that platform for 12 months.The Zuckerberg approach, which represents a fairly absolutist view, is that the social media platforms should not define objectionable speech unless it is way beyond the bounds of anything that should be tolerated according to their standards.
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Op-Ed: Why California's small businesses may not survive the pandemic'The need for social distancing protocols has worked against small stores that rely heavily on personal contact with customers and can’t make up all of their revenues through online sales.' (via latimesopinion)
Read more »
James Bennet resigns from New York Times after Cotton op-ed backlashThe editor of The New York Times' editorial page, James Bennet, has resigned, publisher A.G. Sulzberger announced Sunday. Bennet's resignation comes after the publication of a controversial op-ed from Republican Sen. Tom Cotton earlier in the week drew significant criticism, including from dozens of the newspaper's staffers.
Read more »
Attorney General Barr is seeking to rewrite the narrative surrounding Trump’s controversial photo-opAttorney General William Barr on Sunday tried to re-write the conventional wisdom that a peaceful protest at St John’s Church was violently cleared so...
Read more »
Op-Ed: The future of US global leadership depends on how the nation addresses systemic racismIt must be said plainly and repetitively, so that no one can miss the significance of this historic moment for the United States and its allies, who depend on its leadership.
Read more »
N.Y. Times staffers revolt over decision to publish hawkish Tom Cotton op-edDozens of New York Times reporters, columnists, editors and producers tweeted a singular message late Wednesday: “Running this puts black nytimes staff in danger.”
Read more »