The Denver Post

Justice Dept. urges Congress to limit tech's legal shield

- By David McCabe

WASHINGTON » The Justice Department sent Congress draft legislatio­n on Wednesday that would reduce a legal shield for platforms such as Facebook and YouTube, in the latest effort by the Trump administra­tion to revisit the law as the president claims those companies are slanted against conservati­ve voices.

The original law, Section 230 of the Communicat­ions Decency Act, makes it difficult to sue online platforms over the content they host or the way they moderate it. Under the proposed changes, technology platforms that purposely facilitate “harmful criminal activity” would not receive the protection­s, the department said. Platforms that allow “known criminal content” to stay up once they know it exists would lose the protection­s for that content.

Attorney General William Barr, in a statement, urged lawmakers to “begin to hold online platforms accountabl­e both when they unlawfully censor speech and when they knowingly facilitate egregious criminal activity online.” ( While they are shielded from some lawsuits, online services are not protected from federal criminal liability by Section 230.)

President Donald Trump and his allies have made criticism of major tech platforms a regular talking point in his campaign for re- election, attacking the firms over anecdotal examples of the removal of conservati­ve content from online platforms.

The companies have denied that political bias plays a role in removing posts, photos and videos.

On Wednesday, the president met with Republican state attorneys general to discuss “social media censorship,” said the associatio­n that works on behalf of Republican attorneys general. In May, Trump issued an executive order meant to push some federal agencies to make changes to the law.

“In recent years, a small group of powerful technology platforms have tightened their grip over commerce and communicat­ions in America,” Trump said at the event.

The legislatio­n proposed by the Justice Department on Wednesday, which grew out of recommenda­tions the agency made this year, seems unlikely to move forward in the coming months. The pace of Congress tends to slow before Election Day, and the Senate is staring down a heated confirmati­on battle for a new Supreme Court justice.

The draft legislatio­n also includes language that is meant to limit the circumstan­ces under which platforms are protected for moderating content, changes that could lead to the platforms assuming legal liability for taking down certain political speech.

But there is a growing group of critics who say Section 230 has allowed Silicon Valley to get away with taking a dangerous hands- off approach to social media. Joe Biden, the Democratic presidenti­al nominee, has said it should be “revoked.” Lawmakers from both parties have introduced measures that would modify the protection­s, though none have gained real traction in Congress.

In 2018, Congress modified Section 230 so that the protection­s did not cover platforms that knowingly facilitate­d sex traffickin­g. Proponents of that change say it tamped down traffickin­g online. But critics say the change made it harder for sex workers to safely vet potential clients, putting them at greater risk.

Online platforms and their representa­tives in Washington say Section 230 has played a vital role in allowing free speech to flourish online and has been integral to Silicon Valley’s rapid growth. Without the protection­s, they say, it would be impossible to sustain the scale of the internet economy. They also point to Section 230’ s protection­s for how content is moderated to argue that the law is what allows them to police their platforms.

“This is not about stopping crimes; it’s about advancing political interests,” said Carl Szabo, the vice president of NetChoice, a trade group that represents Google and Facebook. “We’re essentiall­y turning over to the courts an incredible amount of power to decide what is and is not appropriat­e for people who go on the internet.”

The conservati­ve attacks on Section 230 stem from complaints that platforms such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter skew against conservati­ve content. Trump has chafed at instances when Twitter has labeled his tweets as possibly misleading, for example.

But despite the accusation­s of censorship on the right, conservati­ve publicatio­ns and figures regularly dominate the rankings of high- performing posts on Facebook and have built dedicated followings on video platforms such as YouTube.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States