Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
Politics

McConnell Introduces Bill Tying $2K Stimulus Checks to Section 230 Repeal

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday January 05 2021, @02:54PM   Printer-friendly
from the only-have-to-win-once dept.

upstart writes in with an IRC submission:

McConnell introduces bill tying $2K stimulus checks to Section 230 repeal:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has thrown a wrench into Congressional approval of an increase in government stimulus relief checks from $600 to $2,000. The House voted overwhelmingly on Monday to increase the payments, as President Trump had advocated for. Instead of voting on the House bill, however, McConnell blocked it and instead introduced a new bill tying higher stimulus payments to Section 230's full repeal, according to Verge, which obtained a copy of the bill's text.

It's a tangled web, but the move is tied to Trump's veto of the National Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes $740 billion in defense spending for the upcoming government fiscal year. "No one has worked harder, or approved more money for the military, than I have," Trump said in a statement about the veto, claiming falsely that the military "was totally depleted" when he took office in 2017. "Your failure to terminate the very dangerous national security risk of Section 230 will make our intelligence virtually impossible to conduct without everyone knowing what we are doing at every step."

Section 230 has nothing to do with military intelligence; it's a 1996 law designed to protect Internet platforms. At its highest level, the short snippet of law basically does two things. First, it grants Internet service providers, including online platforms, broad immunity from being held legally liable for content third-party users share. Second, it grants those same services legal immunity from the decisions they make around content moderation—no matter how much or how little they choose to do.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
McConnell Introduces Bill Tying $2K Stimulus Checks to Section 230 Repeal | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 209 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by slinches on Tuesday January 05 2021, @06:15PM (4 children)

    by slinches (5049) on Tuesday January 05 2021, @06:15PM (#1095084)

    No they aren't obligated to publish anything. I'm not proposing that anyone be required to publish anything they don't agree with. However if you want to run a platform for others to publish their own content, your protection from legal liability for their content should be contingent on treating all user submissions equally regardless of whether you agree with what it says.

    I don't see why a site that accepts user content and then selects which posts it wants to publish should be treated any differently than the editorial section of a newspaper. They are doing the same thing. Sites like this one where comments from users aren't controlled by anyone but the users themselves do something different. These sites facilitate open public discussion which should be protected.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @07:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @07:08PM (#1095125)

    I don't see why a site that accepts user content and then selects which posts it wants to publish should be treated any differently than the editorial section of a newspaper.

    Because you're an idiot.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @07:48PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @07:48PM (#1095147)

    I go to a gym to workout and get a good swim in. How dare they make rules against me swimming nude?!?!?!?!

    There, does that get through your thick plated skull?

    Here: https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/the-right-to-refuse-service-can-a-business-refuse-service-to-someone-because-of-appearance [legalzoom.com]

    That should help you out. If you feel you are being unfairly discriminated for pushing rightwing Qanon stupidity then you'll have to champion some federal amendments to protect against it. I don't think you'll have much luck, but that is what you are actually looking for.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @09:42PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @09:42PM (#1095238)

    I'm curious as to how sec230 differs from the laws regarding the editorial section of a newspaper.

    How do you feel they should be realigned?