---
title: "Timeline photos Sean Malone on why it's a bad idea to repeal CDA S230…"
date: 2021-01-10
source: facebook
type: Archer T. Ships added a new photo.
---

# Timeline photos Sean Malone on why it's a bad idea to repeal CDA S230…

*January 10, 2021 · Facebook*

::::: {}
::: {}
![](img/2021-01-10-fb-005-img01.webp){style="max-width:100%; margin:1em 0"}
:::

::: {}
Sean Malone on why it\'s a bad idea to repeal CDA S230 protections:\
\
\"Anyone can be a publisher or a platform depending on the context.\
\
The argument people make is that Facebook is acting as a publisher by choosing which speech is or is not acceptable but claiming immunity like a platform which should be content neutral.\
\
Legally speaking, this distinction actually \*does\* make sense and it\'s not really a special privilege imo. I should not be liable for stuff you write in a comment on my blog. You should be. Just as I should be liable for what \*I\* say on my blog.\
\
Problem is, if I start moderating the comments on the blog, I\'m being selective and taking a proactive role in which comments are or are not allowed - meaning, I\'m making an editorial choice.\
\
So the rub is this: If I\'m making an editorial choice, am I now acting sufficiently like a publisher so as to be liable for those comments?\
\
I don\'t know. Maybe.\
\
That\'s the issue.\
\
Repealing Section 230 would treat all speech on social networks as if it was intentionally published by Facebook or Twitter or whatever. We - as users - would, in essence, be unpaid staff writers for Facebook Magazine. And if you said something that is legally actionable, such as calling Nicholas Sandmann a white supremacist when he was not, Nicholas Sandmann could sue the \$761 billion dollar corporate entity \"Facebook\" instead of just suing Cole.\
\
This doesn\'t really make sense, unless Facebook is being so controlling over what is or is not on their platform that it is tantamount to editorial judgment.\
\
The argument here is that Facebook has crossed that line.\
\
And OK\... Fine. Maybe they have.\
\
The problem \*I\* have with people\'s call to repeal Section 230 is that it puts a ton of other websites at risk for no reason while strongly incentivizing Facebook and other social networks to maximize their editorial control instead of minimizing it.\
\
So\... The issue of Section 230 is a real one that is complex and worthy of discussion. It just wouldn\'t have the result people hope. \"
:::
:::::