VIDEOSGZERO World with Ian BremmerQuick TakePUPPET REGIMEIan ExplainsGZERO ReportsAsk IanGlobal Stage
Site Navigation
Search
Human content,
AI powered search.
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Tech in 60 Seconds
Watch as Nicholas Thompson, editor-in-chief of WIRED, explains what's going on in technology news,
Presented by
Nicholas Thompson, editor-in-chief of WIRED, shares his perspective on technology news in Tech In (a little over) 60 Seconds:
What is the deal with Twitter and Facebook censoring a New York Post story on Hunter Biden?
The New York Post ran a story on Hunter Biden. It may have been entirely false. It may have been hacked. Both of those things are problems. But the complicated thing is when the story ran, nobody at Facebook and nobody at Twitter knew whether it was false or whether it had been hacked. The two companies responded in different ways. Facebook said, we're just going to down-rank it. Twitter initially said, "we just won't let it be shared." Twitter then backtracked. Basically, there is a really hard problem of what you do with false information and what you do with hacked information. Neither company has totally clear policies and both got caught in the slipstream.
Was the censoring of the New York Post story the catalyst for the FCC's public statements to rewrite Section 230?
Yes, absolutely. So Section 230 is the very important Internet law that allows the tech companies to filter content on their platforms. It essentially says, hey, if you run a platform, whether it's Facebook, Twitter or a Web site comments, you are not responsible for comments and for content that other people post there. And not only that, you have the ability to within certain limits, censor, change, edit the content out there without becoming a publisher and becoming liable. So that is partly what has allowed the tech companies to do what they do. It's allowed them to thrive and it's also allowed them to have policies policing misinformation or false statements on their platforms. So, Donald Trump got very mad at it, and so Ajit Pai, the head of the FCC, said, "hey, we're going to look at Section 230 and interpret it." In my opinion, that's garbage. Section 230 may be a bad law. It may be bad that the tech companies filter content on their platforms, whatever. I don't see how the FCC has the authority to deal with that. It is a law that gets interpreted by the courts. So, Congress can change the law, or the courts can change the interpretation of the law. I don't see why the FCC has authority, but who knows? It's just my guess, Ajit Pai is trying to please Donald Trump.
Keep reading...Show less
More from Tech in 60 Seconds
The appeal of free speech social media platforms like Parler
November 16, 2020
Will the next president bridge the digital divide?
November 02, 2020
DOJ antitrust case against Google; why Quibi failed
October 26, 2020
Will there be a big tech breakup? Apple likely to announce 5G phone
October 12, 2020
Europe's challenge to Facebook; Amazon home drones
September 28, 2020
Does Trump's TikTok & WeChat ban limit free speech?
September 19, 2020
Russian hackers found targeting US election; robots that write?
September 13, 2020
Barr pressures DOJ to bring antitrust suit against Google
September 08, 2020
Uber, Lyft, Epic & Apple: what's at stake in Big Tech lawsuits
August 24, 2020
Digital campaigning in 2020 will rely on personal connections
August 17, 2020
What the tech antitrust hearing did and did not prove
July 31, 2020
Twitter bans QAnon; CRISPR gene tech
July 25, 2020
Facebook civil rights audit; TikTok in Hong Kong
July 11, 2020
AI & vaccines; TikTok vs YouTube; HBO Max
May 22, 2020
GZERO Series
GZERO Daily: our free newsletter about global politics
Keep up with what’s going on around the world - and why it matters.

























