The internet’s role in gun violence

Politico Morning Tech

Legal protections: “All posts on 8chan are the responsibility of the individual poster and not the administration of 8chan, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 230,” reads one line of tiny fine print on the site’s landing page, invoking Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the clause that gives 8chan and other websites legal immunity for user-generated content. The statute has been at the center of a growing debate over whether the legal shield is providing cover to tech companies that need to do more to combat hate speech and disinformation. (Republicans have also floated the idea of weakening 230 because, they say, Google, Facebook and Twitter are biased against conservatives.) The 8chan link to the El Paso shooting could accelerate talk of changing the law. But industry groups argue 230 helps tech platforms police bad content. “Section 230 empowers platforms to stop the spread of vile content from the dark corners of the Internet,” Carl Szabo, general counsel at NetChoice, told MT. “Without Section 230, extreme speech would become more prevalent online — not less.”

They’re barking up the wrong tree on Section 230

The Economic Standard

That’s according to Robert Winterton, Director of Communications at NetChoice, a trade association committed to protecting free enterprise and free expression online, writing in the OC Register. A measure implemented in 1996 to establish the legal responsibility of content creators for whatever they post on the Internet — surely a good idea? — Section 230 has come under fire from the likes of Ted Cruz and Tucker Carlson as a “handout” to big tech companies like Google and Facebook in the wake of terrorism and alleged election meddling controversies. The fact that neither company existed when the law was passed is your first clue that the logic here may be faulty, and Winterton lays out a convincing argument supported, among other things, by analysis from the Mercatus Center.

Media v. Tech Continued

Politico

— But critics say the media industry is using big tech as a scapegoat for its business model woes. “It’s clear this is just an attack on social media by big media companies upset that they no longer control our news and views,” said Carl Szabo, general counsel at NetChoice, a trade group representing Facebook, Google and Twitter, in June. “Big media is struggling to dominate again as they did before the internet. … Rather than looking for government to tear down tech businesses, big media should follow tech’s lead and innovate so they are more competitive.”

U.S. Senator introduces a new Social Media Addiction Reduction Tech (SMART) Act that bans endless scrolling and autoplay

Packt

According to Bloomberg, Google and Facebook declined to comment. NetChoice, a trade group that counts both companies as members, said, “The goal of this bill is to make being online a less-enjoyable experience.”

Amazon targeted (again) at Dem debate

Politico Morning Tech

Critics say the media industry is using big tech as a scapegoat for its business model woes. “It’s clear this is just an attack on social media by big media companies upset that they no longer control our news and views,” said Carl Szabo, general counsel at NetChoice, a trade group representing Facebook, Google and Twitter, in June. “Big media is struggling to dominate again as they did before the internet. … Rather than looking for government to tear down tech businesses, big media should follow tech’s lead and innovate so they are more competitive.”

Senator’s bill would ban YouTube, Facebook scrolls as addictive

The Business Times

Google and Facebook declined to comment. NetChoice, a trade group that counts both companies as members, said, “The goal of this bill is to make being online a less-enjoyable experience.”

Senator’s Bill Would Ban YouTube, Facebook Scrolls as Addictive

Bloomberg Quaint

Google and Facebook declined to comment. NetChoice, a trade group that counts both companies as members, said, “The goal of this bill is to make being online a less-enjoyable experience.

Protecting The Internet From Government Censorship Is Key To The Future Of Global Trade

Forbes

As the U.S. and China wrestle over tariffs, public attention naturally focuses on manufacturing. But for years manufacturing’s share of global trade has been shrinking, while trade in services has been growing. The economy of the future will be leveraged on the exchange of knowledge and intellectual property. This should make commercial services sold via the internet central to any new U.S. trade agreements.

Read More…