Rules of Forums may change

It is possible that soon rules for most social media forums and discussion groups will be forced to change with a new ruling that forums are no longer shielded from litigation over users' posts.

It is a very complicated issue. In short it's referred to as Section 230.

Basically Section 230 says a forum operator cant be sued for posts made by users.

Section 230 could be canceled, limited, or even removed.

Removal of 230 would open the door to lawsuits over libel, for example, in forum posts. Yes, the forum owner could be held liable.

Watch 230 carefully. If changed you might see forums closing rather than the owners risking litigation or facing moderation requirements.

You may want to read this: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/15/fcc-chairman-says-he-will-to-clarify-tech-legal-shield-section-230.html

That would kill forums, which is probably the intent. My personal belief is that if the people who opened the internet to commercial use saw the exchange of ideas and information as we have it now we would still be using Prodigy(R) accounts.

There is no social redeeming value in libel. Thankfully this forum has pretty good limits on what can be posted but changes to 230 could end "free speech" forums which are nothing more that hate sites and troll sites.

Good. Site owners should take some responsibility for what goes on their sites.

I can think of one site whose visitors come here often that would be top.of the chopping block

I would tend yo agree ttat it is a 'trial baloon' from a pompous lout, but after all the hearings are over i doubt there will be much change. Pulic figure protection may increase but ta is a separate issue.

MySpace turned into a dump pretty quick. Wanna go back there now?

Quote: ChumpChange

MySpace turned into a dump pretty quick. Wanna go back there now?

It is still open?

Quote: AlanMendelson

It is possible that soon rules for most social media forums and discussion groups will be forced to change with a new ruling that forums are no longer shielded from litigation over users' posts.

It is a very complicated issue. In short it's referred to as Section 230.

Basically Section 230 says a forum operator cant be sued for posts made by users.

Section 230 could be canceled, limited, or even removed.

Removal of 230 would open the door to lawsuits over libel, for example, in forum posts. Yes, the forum owner could be held liable.

Watch 230 carefully. If changed you might see forums closing rather than the owners risking litigation or facing moderation requirements.

You may want to read this: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/15/fcc-chairman-says-he-will-to-clarify-tech-legal-shield-section-230.html

I hope it passes. People should be held accountable for both what is printed and what they allow to be printed.

Quote: AZDuffman

That would kill forums, which is probably the intent. My personal belief is that if the people who opened the internet to commercial use saw the exchange of ideas and information as we have it now we would still be using Prodigy(R) accounts.

Agree 100%, and you and I don't agree on all that.

My next self-education project is to catch up on research spotlighting the effects of (1)internet and (2)forum use on cognition. It'll probably take me a year to get some working idea of what's going on, but well worth it.

Quote: redietz

Agree 100%, and you and I don't agree on all that.

My next self-education project is to catch up on research spotlighting the effects of (1)internet and (2)forum use on cognition. It'll probably take me a year to get some working idea of what's going on, but well worth it.

Watch the first couple seasons of "Halt and Catch Fire" for an interesting take on forums, called BBS back then. People gravitated towards them same as the gravitated to CB Radio in the 70s. People have a desire for informal communication with people from far and wide. When I was on USENET in 1991 it was amazing to me. A few takeaways from back then:

1. Males accounted for probably 90%+ of posters. Women might have lurked, but they were shy to post.
2. It was and is hard for a new person on a forum to "break in" and be accepted.
3. White people almost always assumed that the person on the other side was white, unless they had an Asian name.
4. Given that 80%+ of users were white back then this is not a totally wrong assumption.
5. Problem users then behaved the same as now. There was and is no way to rationally deal with them. They have to be nuked.
6. There were more lurkers than you realized. I had one asked if I was X handle and shook my hand for my posts. Out of nowhere.

Remove the immunity that section 230 provides to the entities that own and operate sites, and the lawyers will tell the owners that they won't be able to avoid expensive lawsuits. Not lawsuits that are legitimate or justified - actions by individuals or organizations that are after out-of-court settlements.

In Texas in the sixties, Melvin Belli and others originated the concept of suing anyone and everyone connected with some supposedly evil activity. The idea was to coax private settlements from deep-pocket defendants who would rather settle than risk a court judgement.

In 2004 there was a nightclub fire in Rhode Island. Plaintiffs sued everyone that had any connection with the tragedy: the owners, obviously, but also the state and town, their inspectors, the state fire marshal, the band that was playing, the band members individually. But also... Anheuser-Busch (the joint served Budweiser), the trucking company that delivered the beer, the radio station that sponsored the concert, the TV station that sent a reporter to cover the concert, the TV reporter that was there, the cameraman who filmed it for the TV station, the TV station soundman, the manufacturer of the acoustic foam on the walls, the company that sold the foam to the venue, the guy who tacked the foam on the walls. On, and on, and on.

The nightclub fire was something that deserved litigation. While many of the guilty went relatively unscathed. many peripheral defendants like A/B Budweiser and the TV station, settled out-of-court to avoid a trial that would have focused on the gruesome details.

Will the Wizard continue to be associated with a forum where every response that would clearly justify a suspension could also come with a multi-million dollar lawsuit? Doubtful.

Facebook's botched Australia news ban hits health departments, charities and its own pages | Facebook | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/feb/18/facebook-blocks-health-departments-charities-and-its-own-pages-in-botched-australia-news-ban

How is it that in less than half a generation so many individuals, businesses and governments can become so utterly dependant on a single website?

Quote: Gialmere

How is it that in less than half a generation so many individuals, businesses and governments can become so utterly dependant on a single website?

I've been wishing for years that a competitor to FB would arise.

And it's not LinkedIn.

Quote: smoothgrh

I've been wishing for years that a competitor to FB would arise.

And it's not LinkedIn.

Maybe MySpace will come back. It was the Facebook before Facebook.

I've been waiting for years for someone to explain to me how it could possibly be that FB would be so bereft of competition.

Say what you want about that devil incarnate, Zuckerberg, but it is unbelievable that anyone could create something as totally absorbing as Facebook.

I would guess that for anyone older than a certain age, the ability of FB to suck so many in is unfathomable.

And for people under that age, I wonder if they are even aware what is being done to them.

Facebook is no longer providing "news" in Australia. So what!

Duplicate

Quote: smoothgrh

I've been wishing for years that a competitor to FB would arise.

And it's not LinkedIn.

Google tried and failed, so good luck with that. No potential competitor is going to have Google's built-in user base.

There are actually a few competitors to Facebook, mostly various phone apps, just none are nearly as successful.

Quote: Gialmere

How is it that in less than half a generation so many individuals, businesses and governments can become so utterly dependant on a single website?

For a moment, I thought you were talking about Amazon.
Or Wikipedia.
Or Twitter.
Or Uber.
Or . . . .

Quote: DRich

Maybe MySpace will come back. It was the Facebook before Facebook.

I actually liked my space much better than Facebook because you could customize your page with music, art and various other things it was basically like having your own custom website linked to others. If I recall correctly, one goals of Myspace was getting others to add you as one of their top 10 friends. Once you ran out of your own top 10 you had to encourage others to add you as one of their top 10 friends even though they were not among your top 10 friends. Bring back Myspace in its original form.

Friendster was where it's at.

Quote: smoothgrh

I've been wishing for years that a competitor to FB would arise.

And it's not LinkedIn.

Any competitor that comes along that's worth a damn will just be bought by Facebook (see: Instagram).