Sen. Marsha Blackburn, (R-Tenn.) is joining the Republican-led fight to change internet regulations that she said allow social media platforms to "disadvantage conservative thought."
The senator is getting behind an effort to reform Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects online services from legal liability for what users publish on their platforms.
"We are working on legislation that would address reforms that would put a threshold in place," she said. "Users that are 50 million and less, you would have Section 230 protections. The bigger users would not have those safe harbors."
Blackburn framed the reforms as an effort to stop censorship of conservative voices.
"They suggestively manipulate their algorithms," she alleged of social media platforms. "You look at what's happening on YouTube, and it's the wild west. You can put up anything, say anything, and it's there, except when it comes to conservatives. Conservative filmmakers, conservative entertainers, people in Christian music have had their movie trailers, their videos, their songs removed from some of these platforms."
Democrats have argued that removing this protection will have the opposite effect, leading to more censorship and legal complications for online service providers.
The Trump administration has signaled its support for overhauling the legislation as well. On May 28, the president issued an executive order ordering the Commerce Department to petition the Federal Communications Commission to refine the current regulations. The Justice Department has since urged Congress to revise Section 230.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced a bill on Wednesday that would, among other things, allow users to sue an online platform for $5,000 plus attorneys' fees if they feel the provider is not "operating in good faith" and unfairly applying their respective content rules.
"If they want to say they're the public square, where people have free speech and public debate, you can't do that," Blackburn said.
She added that current regulations' lack of clarity has led to abuses.
"The definitions in 230 are overly broad," she claimed. "Things that are abusive or unlawful, we need to be more specific in those definitions. We need to also say that political speech is free speech.
Emily Hoeven, newsletter editor at CalMatters, joins Cheddar News to discuss California Governor Gavin Newsom's gun law modeled after Texas's abortion law.
Chuck Rocha, host of 'Nuestro' podcast and opinion contributor at The New York Times, joins Cheddar News to discuss why Democrats are losing Hispanic voters.
More businesses are requiring workers to return to the office, but there is concern that many employees in the middle class, especially women and people of color, need remote work options for reasons including childcare and financial security. Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California, joined Cheddar to discuss why office mandates could be detrimental to the middle class. She noted that while companies claim a return to offices would help foster more collaboration and efficiency, reports show that they are successfully able to do their jobs from home.
The U.S. postal service has confirmed that it secretly developed and tested a blockchain-based mobile voting system ahead of the 2020 election. Susan Greenhalgh, senior advisor on election security, Free Speech for People, joins Cheddar News to discuss the cybersecurity complications of a mobile voting system.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled to allow the controversial Texas abortion law to remain in effect, banning abortion at six weeks and allowing any private citizen to sue a person or doctor aiding or abetting someone seeking an abortion. Outraged at this decision, California Governor Gavin Newsom is working to draft a proposal in line with the law as it relates to guns. Shawn Hubler, California correspondent at the New York Times, joins Cheddar News to discuss.
Even as tech giant Google implements a vaccination mandate, charging its employees to declare their vaccine status within a time frame or risk dismissal, the federal government is tangled up in the court system trying to impose one of its own. Cindy Cohn, the executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Harry Nelson, founder and managing partner of Nelson Hardiman LLP, joined Cheddar to debate the ethics, efficacy, and legality surrounding the issue. While Cohn noted that she thinks the federal mandate might be legally sound, her organization is also concerned with a separate question of privacy. "At EFF what we're most interested in is the digital surveillance that's going along with some of these attempts to try to track and confirm whether people are vaccinated or not," she said.
