By David DiMolfetta
In one of the few areas of U.S. politics that unite members of Congress from both sides of the aisle, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey were grilled by lawmakers in a March 25 House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on the dangers of their social media platforms and their Section 230 liability shield.
Section 230, a law affixed under the 1996 Communications Decency Act, protects online platforms from civil and criminal liability for user content and allows for the moderation of content posted on their sites. Large online platforms have defended it, citing it as the beating heart that keeps them alive.
The CEOs’ appearances were their first before a House panel since the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, which have been heavily linked to social media. The hearing indicated both Republicans and Democrats support revision of the law, with concerns that it gives big tech companies too much power in content moderation.
“We’re going to see some changes in Section 230,” said Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), the committee’s former chairman.
Zuckerberg expressed openness in changing the law, suggesting that larger platforms should be required to issue transparency updates on what content is moderated. He said that Facebook already does this and added that more accountability should be enforced regarding “clearly illegal” content.
Dorsey and Pichai responded with interest in the law changes but did not commit directly to Zuckerberg’s proposals.
“It is very hard to determine what’s a large platform and a small platform, and it may incentivize the wrong things,” Dorsey said.
“There are definitely good proposals on transparency and accountability, which I’ve seen in various legislative proposals as well, which I think are important principles,” Pichai said. “And we would certainly welcome legislative approaches in that area.”
In May 2020, former U.S President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing the U.S. Department of Commerce to file a petition for rulemaking with the Federal Communications Commission, asking the agency to review Section 230. In October 2020, then-Chairman Ajit Pai said he planned to move forward with rulemaking to clarify the law’s meaning. He later flip-flopped on his decision, saying that he did not have enough time before his departure to resolve any confusion.
Several ideas were suggested in the hearing, including one from Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), proposing a public entity to oversee the decisions that the companies now make on content moderation.
Dorsey pushed back on such practices. “Forcing every business to behave the same reduces innovation and individual choice,” he said.
In a March 16 Washington Times op-ed, Consumers’ Research Executive Director Will Hild said that a reform of Section 230 is an optimal method for addressing big tech supremacy. Hild argued that current antitrust regulations already provide enough enforcement tools necessary to protect consumers from price collusion, unfair competitive practices, and abuse.
“Shifting the focus of antitrust law away from the consumer would open a Pandora’s box of regulatory uncertainty and turmoil onto the nation’s economy,” he said.
Other concerns spanned the hearing, including social media’s effect on children, where Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH) discussed child exposure to cyberbullying screen addiction.
“Big Tech is essentially handing our children a lit cigarette and hoping they will stay hooked for life,” Johnson said. “There’s a lot of smugness among you. There’s this air of untouchableness in your response to many of [the] tough questions you’ve been asked.”
“The research we’ve seen is that using social apps to connect to other people can have health benefits,” Zuckerberg said in response. He added that Facebook was internally researching these matters.
Section 230 has been threatened by members of both parties, though there are disagreements over which content moderation practices should be overhauled.
“The time for self-regulation is over,” said Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), chairman of the committee. “It’s time we legislate to hold you accountable.”
