Even though Congress is still in town, it’s time for the first Summer Reading of 2020. We start with the importance of Section 230 and why government regulation of social media platforms is a bad idea. In totally unrelated news, the Discovery Channel’s Shark Week begins on Sunday. Usually, Shark Week is a frightening look at one of nature’s fiercest predators (even fiercer than a member of Congress feeding on tax dollars). Well, with all that’s happened in 2020, Shark Week might be nice and relaxing.
Summer Reading – Section 230
Lawmakers are ready to leave town and go lay on the beach with their faces buried in an exciting (and hopefully non-political) book. But no matter how riveting that book is, there is the ever-present tendency to…check social media for any mentions of themselves or the latest sizzling hot takes. Social media platforms and the internet writ large can be a cesspool of clap backs, ad hominem attacks, and overall nastiness. But overall, the digital domain allows for open-ended discourse and has powered a free, vibrant civil society for the past two decades. Some lawmakers want to ignore the big picture and punish digital platforms for ostensibly engaging in “censorship.” One particular area of focus for these members of Congress is Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which offers broad-based liability protections for internet platforms.
NetChoice Vice President and General Counsel Carl Szabo explains the scope of the law and the novel protections it offers: “Section 230 guarantees that services that host are not liable for content posted by others, bar some exemptions. Section 230 also enables platforms to remove or otherwise moderate objectionable content without assuming liability…Section 230 isn’t a government handout to Big Tech. Instead it simply codified over seventy years of Court Doctrine — doctrine that has benefited various industries across the country rather than just tech…Conduit immunity is where content creators — not distributors — are held liable for lawbreaking content. Traditionally the U.S. has preferred to hold the creators of lawbreaking content liable, rather than those who happen to distribute it.” The reasoning here is simple and straightforward. Were the federal government to hold these content distributors liable, it would become far more difficult for innovative digital platforms (and a host of other business models) to maintain profitability. And the end result of this would be more “censorship,” not less.
Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have proposed legislation that would roll back Section 230 liability protections. Sen. Hawley’s “Limiting Section 230 Immunity to Good Samaritans Act” would tie these critical protections to tech platforms promising to operate in good faith in their terms of service. Companies could be sued for thousands of dollars for violating these vague contractual obligations. Sen. Graham’s “EARN IT Act” isn’t much better. According to the latest version of the EARN IT Act (passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee), states can condition liability protections on tech companies ending encryption privacy protections for users. Free Press Action Senior Policy Counsel Gaurav Laroia notes, “the amended EARN IT Act leaves so much discretion to states to create new laws in this area, those state-level liability standards could be wildly inconsistent, and the bill incentivizes revisions to those statutes. Those lower standards in civil law and in the states could lead to the shuttering of all sorts of forums and tools that teenagers and young adults use to connect and communicate because companies are fearful of exposing themselves to an avalanche of state suits.”
Instead of undermining Section 230, lawmakers should celebrate the role of these long-standing liability protections in creating a free, vibrant marketplace of ideas. So, lawmakers, feel free to check your newsfeed and go back to that paperback thriller.
C-Band Wireless Auction Moves Forward
It’s been awhile since I’ve written about the C-band wireless spectrum. You remember, that sweet spot of wireless spectrum that satellite providers wanted to sell even though they didn’t own it. Yesterday, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted flexible, common-sense procedures for the auction of new C-band licenses. Slated to begin on December 8, the much-anticipated auction will allow for critical mid-band spectrum to be used for 5G services and enable the Internet of Things. The FCC voted yesterday to establish clock auction design, dates and deadlines, bidding criteria, and payment and credit calculations.
This is exactly what the country needs during this pandemic when people are working from home. We have no idea how long the pandemic will last and if there will be another one in the future. The rise of 5G internet services will pave the way for better connections and lower latencies for millions of households and businesses. But this “latest and greatest generation” of internet connectivity can only become reality if policymakers establish reliable bidding procedures to free up critical mid-band spectrum for digital access. The FCC’s vote to create the rules of the road for the upcoming C-band auction is a pivotal step in the right direction.
The FCC has a fantastic track-record in ensuring efficient spectrum auctions that generate plenty of revenue for taxpayers. Since 1994, the agency has conducted more than 100 auctions generating more than $120 billion in net winning bids for taxpayers. As the ultimate owners of spectrum, taxpayers deserve to be compensated fairly by license holders. The latest agreed-upon auction procedures for the C-band will result in tens of billions of dollars for taxpayers, while paving the way for next-generation digital services. The C-band auction will be a win for taxpayers and consumers struggling to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. TPA applauds Chairman Pai and the FCC commissioners for committing to a fair, reliable process that will help close the digital divide and protect taxpayers.
Blogs:
Monday: Postmaster General DeJoy Delivers On Postal Reform
Tuesday: Bipartisan Bribery Scandals Show Need to Hold Public Officials Accountable
Wednesday: Coalition Commends Sens. Cassidy and Wicker for Healthcare Legislation Without Price Controls
Friday: SUMMER READING: Section 230 and Internet Freedom
Media:
August 3, 2020: WBFF (Fox, Baltimore) interviewed me about the expiring enhanced federal unemployment benefits.
August 3, 2020: The Galion Inquirer (Galion, Ohio) ran TPA’s op-ed, “HEALS Act replete with wasteful spending.”
August 4, 2020: Townhall ran TPA’s op-ed, “Bipartisan Bribery Scandals Show Need to Hold Public Officials Accountable.”
August 4, 2020: The Center Square ran TPA’s op-ed, “‘Hire American’ will lead to higher costs, fewer opportunities for Americans.”
August 5, 2020: Inside Sources ran TPA’s op-ed, “FCC Boosts Telehealth Funding in Effort to Aid Coronavirus Response.”
August 5, 2020: I appeared on KRC Radio (Cincinnati, Ohio) to talk about government corruption in Ohio and Illinois.
August 5, 2020: Inside Sources ran TPA’s op-ed, “No More Billionaire Bailouts.”
August 6, 2020: WBFF (Fox, Baltimore) interviewed me about school openings in Maryland.
August 6, 2020: I appeared on WBOB Radio (600 AM and 101 FM; Jacksonville, Fla.) to talk about the next round of relief funds and schools opening.
August 6, 2020: The Washington Examiner mentioned TPA in their article, “Conservatives Urge Senate GOP to Block Renewable Tax Extenders.”
August 7, 2020: WBFF (Fox, Baltimore) interviewed me about the latest unemployment numbers.
Have a great weekend, stay safe, and as always, thanks for your continued support.
Best,
David Williams
President
Taxpayers Protection Alliance
1401 K Street, NW
Suite 502
Washington, D.C. xxxxxx
www.protectingtaxpayers.org
