I was making more of a comment on how diminished free expression already is than offering my thoughts on what will or should happen.

The issue with 230 was that platforms were trying to have it both ways, by actively curating content and being immune from liability, which gave them an unfair advantage over publishers. I always thought they should either insist more strongly that platforms not act as editors or just extend the protections to everyone.

Repealing 230 seems like it would open a gnarly can of worms.

Undisciplined

Isn't the whole thing with section 230 that a platform like SN isn't liable if one of the users uploads a threat or some kind of libel? In the case of a normal book or newspaper publisher, they could be sued for publishing the libel, whereas with "user generated content" section 230 was supposed to allow the platform to be exempt from the liability.

But the larger point you make is good: there are many jurisdictions that have no such protections and they still have the user generated content.

Politics_And_Law

Congress threatens Section 230 with H.R.6746 and S.3546 | USIPS

Scoresby

Isn't the whole thing with section 230 that a platform like SN isn't liable if one of the users uploads a threat or some kind of libel? In the case of a normal book or newspaper publisher, they could be sued for publishing the libel, whereas with "user generated content" section 230 was supposed to allow the platform to be exempt from the liability.

But the larger point you make is good: there are many jurisdictions that have no such protections and they still have the user generated content. 