Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
I think Section 230 needs to be modified, clearly defining the difference between large social media and everything else, and then making two sets of rules -- one for the smaller, specialty sites, and one for the large, influential sites.

I think that would fix it. Basically tie the large sites having Section 230 protection to the fair and equitable treatment of political censorship, sort of along the lines of the now-antiquated Fairness Doctrine for TV and radio from several decades ago.
This is the correct approach. Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Twitter hold a near monopoly on network traffic for their respective types of content. There is no question that we treat (and their companies market) these platforms as forms of "public squares". Political censorship therefore has no place on them. Correspondingly, niche "private club" type platforms like 9th tier poker forums or German scat porn enthusiast websites ought not be under the same obligation.