[cdoctorow]

Here's the thing:

> Misinformation about COVID being the most prescient and recent example for most people probably, propaganda from all sides that continues radicalization and polarization, and also tons of harassment campaigns arranged across sites and services too numerous to name, the most vile content you can think of in whatever stripe comes to mind for you, etc. etc., Section 230 prevents any of the websites that are caught distributing it from being held liable. And I cannot envision a situation where being held legally culpable for such material would not directly incentivize, and with ZEAL, those tech monoliths to get the shit under control.

Disinformation is not illegal. Even if platforms had joint liability for disinformation, that liability is...zero. There is nothing in US law that prohibits disinformation. Rather, there is a Constitutional right to speak without state sanction, e.g. the First Amendment.

Likewise: the vast majority of harassment (as in > 99.9%) does not rise to the level of illegal conduct, and where it does, the cases are fact intensive and the relief is almost certainly injunctive, which is to say, if you prove to a court that certain conduct is illegal harassment, the best you can hope for is that the judge will order the harasser to cease.

Which is to say: the two kinds of content you worry about the platforms carrying, for which you think shared liability will present some remedy, are legal to carry and there is no liability, shared or otherwise, for hosting it.

For avoidance of doubt, I am profoundly concerned about both harassment and disinformation... And also getting rid of CDA 230 will not create a legal obligation on the platforms to do anything about either.