House Republicans are debating reforming or even repealing legal protections for online publishers, as some favor cracking down on what they describe as a pervasive Big Tech anti-conservative bias, while others argue doing so would harm the economy.
At issue is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a provision that protects social media companies from liability for content posted by their users.
Members of both parties say that they’re interested in working together to reform Section 230 because social media giants such as Facebook and Twitter have too much power in terms of content moderation and that the law gives them undue protections.
“At this point, all options and ideas are welcome. Nothing is off the table,” said Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the top Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction.
She said that Big Tech “must be stopped” after years of evading congressional action and stall tactics.
Rodgers’s counterpart on the committee, Democratic Chairman Frank Pallone, has said that “Section 230 badly needs reform.”
“I recommend that Republicans and Democrats work together to reach an agreement to sunset or establish a reauthorization date for Section 230 until Big Tech will work with us on meaningful reform,” Rodgers said in a statement to the Washington Examiner.
Ranking chairwoman Rodgers released a “Big Tech Accountability Platform” two weeks ago that indicates anti-conservative bias on social media remains a key priority for the GOP. The first item on the plan’s agenda is reforming Section 230 by pushing to repeal Big Tech companies’ liability protections when they “neglect their ‘Good Samaritan’ obligations.” The “Good Samaritan” clause of Section 230 is what gives tech companies immunity for content moderation decisions taken in good faith that the platforms consider to be objectionable or problematic in nature.
Republicans’ focus on allegations of anti-conservative bias stems from multiple conservative figures being restricted or banned from social media in the past few months, most notably former President Donald Trump following the violent Capitol attack on Jan. 6. Since the attack, Trump has been banned from most major social media platforms, including Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Reddit, and Twitch.
Trump has, on multiple occasions, explicitly called to repeal Section 230 altogether due to allegations of unfair conservative censorship.
Although a full repeal seems unlikely, Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee are optimistic about finding agreement with Democrats on reforming Section 230.
“This is really the most bipartisan committee in Congress, and we tackle a lot of big issues, Section 230 is a really big issue that there’s appetite on both sides for,” a senior Republican committee aide said.
Republicans say that they no longer have confidence in social media companies to make the right decisions when it comes to content moderation and growing issues like the spread of misinformation.
“We’ve seen countless recent examples of how Big Tech has broken our sense of trust that they can be fair stewards for ensuring equitable standards of free speech and truth in public information,” congressman Gus Bilirakis, a Republican on the committee, told the Washington Examiner.
Although there are some differences regarding how the two parties approach Section 230 reform, such as disputes over the accuracy of social media’s alleged anti-conservative bias, Republicans said their Big Tech plan made clear their intention to work with the other side.
“You’ll notice our plan, it was political but not partisan. We didn’t take any shots at the Democrats. And that is because we sincerely do want to find bipartisan opportunities here,” the senior Republican committee aide said.
Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky, the chairwoman of the consumer protection subcommittee, has agreed with Rodgers on many facets of Section 230 reform and tech accountability more broadly.
Both parties seem wary, at this point, about repealing Section 230 altogether, with each side saying that a repeal could hurt small businesses and entrepreneurship through increased regulation and create less free speech because tech platforms would be liable for all user-generated content and thus censor more people.
Rep. Debbie Lesko, an Arizona Republican on the committee, said that she disagreed with Trump’s desire to repeal Section 230.
Lesko, who is known as a loyal ally of Trump, also called into question the evidence behind calls for a full repeal of the law.
“Republicans that want to repeal Section 230, I don’t know how much they’ve studied the law and if they’re just basing it on Trump’s support or some deep study of the issue,” Lesko told the Washington Examiner.
Instead, Lesko said that one area both parties have come together on is pushing for greater clarity from social media companies regarding their content moderation techniques.
“One thing Democrats and Republicans agree on is more transparency from Facebook and Twitter on what their rules are and what their algorithms are doing,” said Lesko.
“The Big Tech companies are going to push back on everything, but they’ve really gone too far,” Lesko added.
In terms of Section 230 reform legislation that she supports, Lesko said she endorses Republican Rep. Jim Jordan’s bill known as the Protect Speech Act. Jordan is the top Republican on the powerful House Judiciary Committee.
She said Jordan’s proposal is “the most comprehensive bill” on the issue and would eliminate the unfair or selective censorship of conservatives on social media.
