
Silicon Valley’s self-regulating days probably should be over, Nancy Pelosi says - rmason
https://www.recode.net/podcasts/2019/4/11/18306834/nancy-pelosi-speaker-house-tech-regulation-antitrust-230-immunity-kara-swisher-decode-podcast
======
Para2016
"Communications Decency Act, which says that internet companies are not
responsible for what is posted on their platforms"

So Pelosi opposes this and thinks "internet companies" should be held
accountable and monitor every single communication or media file posted on a
website/platform. So it's just private censorship mandated by the government.
Pretty unoriginal work around to suppressing free speech.

~~~
monkeydreams
Do you feel that they should be held to a different standard to every other
media? Television stations are responsible for what is televised, radio
stations for what they broadcast, newspapers for what they print - but somehow
internet companies are not responsible for what they store and communicate due
to the number of messages they must monitor?

OK, that's fine, we'll treat them like common carriers and regulate them.

~~~
toast0
Television and radio are heavily regulated in part because there is limited
spectrum set aside for broadcasts. Television, radio, and newspapers exert a
great amount of editorial control.

Common carrier is a great model for this. AT&T isn't responsible for the
content of phone calls, and they also don't exert any editorial control over
them. Many popular platforms are kind of trying to be free to do whatever, but
also exert editorial control, which seems untenable.

Disclaimer: i work for a silicon valley company; opinions are mine, not my
employers.

~~~
monkeydreams
> AT&T isn't responsible for the content of phone calls, and they also don't
> exert any editorial control over them.

AT&T is a common carrier for mobile and voice services so I'm not sure why you
are raising them as a counter example. While they are not responsible for the
content that is sent on their network, they do work with law enforcement and
the intelligence community to ensure that specific crimes which occur only
over telecommunications (i.e. threatening someone over the phone) can be
investigated and proscecuted.

> and they also don't exert any editorial control over them.

Also, this is a requirement of being a common carrier. They have to send
everything from A to B regardless of (lawful) content. Facebook, Twitter, et
al, seemingly want to create an environment in which they can self-
editorialise but are not held up to even the basic standards of a common
carrier.

~~~
sjg007
Ahh but they are not common carriers for mobile since they prioritize traffic.

~~~
monkeydreams
A correction to what I said - they are not common carrier for mobile _data_.
They _are_ common carriers for mobile voice communications.

There is a whole series of FTC v AT&T lawsuits which outline this argument and
the extent to which they are subject to FTC regulation, if you're interested.

~~~
sjg007
Voice over LTE is technically packetized and delivered over IP. So that they
prioritize traffic still may be an issue.

