������Ƶ

In filed with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), ������Ƶ’s Open Technology Institute (OTI) and Ranking Digital Rights (RDR) urged the FCC to reject any further consideration of a petition for rulemaking filed by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) that purports to provide clarity on the proper scope of liability protection for online platforms under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. President Trump issued an executive order that directed NTIA to file a petition with the FCC, and NTIA complied as directed. At the time it was issued, OTI condemned the executive order as an unconstitutional attempt to intimidate online platforms.

In their comments, OTI and RDR strongly urge the FCC to not move forward with the petition or seek public comment on this matter by arguing: 1) The FCC lacks the authority to develop regulations relating to Section 230, 2) NTIA’s proposal violates the First Amendment, and 3) The Commission’s consideration and action on NTIA’s proposal would chill free speech of internet users.

The following quote can be attributed to Koustubh “K.J.” Bagchi, senior policy counsel at ������Ƶ’s Open Technology Institute:

“If the Commission accepts NTIA’s petition for rulemaking, it joins an effort to bully platforms into moderating content in a method that is acceptable to those in the administration. The NTIA’s petition is illegitimate on so many grounds, from the unsubstantiated claims regarding the Commission’s rulemaking authority in this area to the petition’s unconstitutional proposal for government to dictate how private companies moderate the content on their platforms. Given the deep sense of discontent across our nation, the need to protect free expression in online spaces is urgent. NTIA’s petition fails to understand that. At the end of the day, the Commission should reject this petition; otherwise, we will see users from marginalized communities have their voices completely diminished in the digital space as platforms will lose the ability to moderate harassment that drives minority voices offline.”

The following quote can be attributed to Nathalie Maréchal, senior policy analyst at ������Ƶ’s Ranking Digital Rights:

“Content moderation and fact-checking are an essential function of social media platforms in a pluralist, rights-respecting society. Companies have the duty to set and enforce content rules that protect users and their communities from the consequences of harmful speech like harassment, incitement to violence, voter disenfranchisement, and medical disinformation. Reinterpreting Section 230 in the way the NTIA petition suggests would prevent companies from fulfilling that duty. The NTIA petition and the Executive Order behind it are clearly intended to stop social media companies from holding President Trump accountable for his repeated violations of platform rules that are designed to protect users, public health, and democracy itself. The petition doesn't seek to protect free speech, but to promote the President’s demand for a bullhorn and rejection of accountability. Moreover, the petition asks the FCC to vastly overstep its legal authority to alter Section 230. The FCC should reject the NTIA petition in the strongest terms.”