[EL] Twitter EO

[Michael Parsons]

Section 230 "clarifications" aside, Section 3 of the EO seems like it might
end up having the most immediate impact.  I can't imagine federal
government ad-spend on social media platforms is high enough to have any
significant effect on the platforms themselves, but it does seem like a
very poor time to prohibit, say, the CDC from boosting the circulation of
information online via paid ads.

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:02 AM Marty Lederman <
Martin.Lederman at law.georgetown.edu> wrote:

> Breathtaking but of course it mostly amounts to directing Commerce to
> petition the FCC (within 30 days) for a proposed reg to "clarify"
> 230(c)(2)(A) law.  Even if Wilbur Ross does so, it's hard to imagine (or it
> *was* hard to imagine, anyway), the FCC doing anything with it.
>
> In other words, it is (not surprisingly) a political document, intended to
> rile up the base.
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:41 AM Nate Persily <npersily at law.stanford.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Attached is the draft of the Executive Order regarding removal of CDA 230
>> liability for Twitter and other internet platforms as well as
>> encouragement of investigations of the Silicon Valley platforms.  Gotta
>> say, this is truly breathtaking.   Eager to hear reactions from defenders
>> of Citizens United on this.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
>
> --
> Marty Lederman
> Georgetown University Law Center
> 600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
> Washington, DC 20001
> 202-662-9937
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200528/2f11610c/attachment.html>