Section 230: the law that saved, and then poisoned, the internet

Congress saved the internet with 23 words. Now those words need an update.

- By Steven Boykey Sidley

No one really debates that the internet and social media are awash with lies, lies and more damned lies.

Depending on one's point of view, arguments will be made about where disinformation is most frustrating and most dangerous - the left will go on about right-wing lies and vice versa.

Every identity group will be outraged by insults to their community, the hate speech will offend and hurt everyone except the haters, and almost every parent will rail against the surreptitious nudging of their children towards dangerous rabbit holes, some of which have resulted in the saddest of stories. (Just this week, Time published a terrifying feature about a young woman who has attempted suicide multiple times. She says: "Everything I learnt about suicide I learnt on Instagram.")

It didn't have to be this way. And it doesn't have to be this way in the future, depending on political will.

Those who know a little about the history of the internet and the regulations formulated to govern it are familiar with these magic words from Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act of 1996:

"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another..."

These words have enabled the worst aspects of the internet. They have protected billion-dollar companies from liability and have ruined countless lives. Put more simply, the wording means: don't shoot the messenger. This piece of legislation has probably done more damage to our world than any other in modern history.