Bad 230 Takes

We're a team of 230 experts commenting on #Section230 & content regulation. DM's are open (and immune from being publicly posted here). Feel free to @ us!

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

If you've appeared in one of our tweets, you may want to read this...
https://t.co/gyTIRWvSF4

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

@ThinkingSapien This is true :). Bigger accounts doing bad 230 takes is always worth highlighting and tagging for.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

It truly never gets old. That is not how #Section230 works, folks! If you see bad takes out there, don't forget to tag us. We do see it, promise!

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

SMH people these days. No, Twitter will not financially pay, nor should they, and thank god for that. Such a case would get tossed very quickly, and rightly so. #Section230 empowers speech online for Anne as much as it does for Tucker as much it does for ordinary people.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

It is worth noting that a terrible bill, the #EARNIT Act, will be getting a markup this week in the Senate Judiciary Committee. It would amend #Section230, undermine #encryption and threaten the #privacy of countless Americans.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

Missed the oral arguments for #GonzalezvGoogle today? Check out @ericgoldman's latest blog post giving a quick debrief on what went down today: https://t.co/eAR3wYpDQD #Section230

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

Gonzalez v Google args start today. Be sure to tune in - this has significant impacts on speech and content on the internet. Be sure to check out #Section230 to see all the takes coming in. Lord knows I am sure we will have some bad ones coming out of it.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

@AloeVapor People do not appreciate just how much terrible content on the internet they DONT see because of the proactive steps taken by companies. That leads to a better internet that we enjoy as a result. Keep tagging us, we do see them I promise!

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

One more before the weekend: #Section230 does protect free speech online, including your bad take here, sir. It also helps platforms take down harmful content. No, not that globalist narrative nonsense - more like terrorist beheading vids and worse you never see. h/t @AloeVapor

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

1A also notably includes freedom of association. It's also a restraint on government, not private companies. Twitter being privately owned versus a publicly traded firm has no implication here whatsoever. Thanks @DevinCow for the tag. Keep it up folks!

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

Those companies are private, and the #FirstAmendment is a restraint on government, not on private actors. Your speech, along with millions of others online, is empowered and available on platforms because of #Section230. h/t @TheCenterStripe for the tag. Please do more folks!

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

Sorry we have been a little inactive since the end of last year. We promise to resume covering bad #Section230 takes as politicians and prominent figures decide to say something. Don't hesitate to tag us.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

@leftcoastbabe The First Amendment is what allows misinformation to flourish. We can't make any changes to 230 that would change that.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

Love the quotations on "edit" as if that means something 😹

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

WHATS THE CAUSE OF ACTION, JAKE

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

@bennyjohnson Section 230 crime LMAO

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

@BADG3RMANTV @ScottAdamsSays Being a publisher doesn't mean you don't get Section 230 protections. It protects any person or business in circumstances where they are being held liable for someone else's content. Fox, CNN, you, and me all get this protection equally.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

@dbellamum @tedlieu @GunBunny16 @elonmusk I'm sorry to say that even hate speech is often legal speech, and for lawmakers to change that would likely be against the First Amendment.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

@realJohnACastro @JohnWDean That's correct. More broadly speaking, federal crimes are not protected by Section 230.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

Dafuq is he talking about. Seriously someone help me

[Nicholas Sandmann @N1ckSandmann]

We never sued twitter for the section 230 complications. That doesn’t mean I’ve given up uncovering the truth of what really went on.

[Bad 230 Takes @BadSec230Takes]

@NewStyle303 @SlinginTrades @egrattan @redleg1066 @huskermitch @jr3575 @mtaibbi @elonmusk @BadLegalTakes lolno