Adam Schiff Is Threatening Social Media Companies To Get Them To Censor More

( California Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff last weekend called for the repeal of the Section 230 protections against liability if social media companies refuse to do more to combat “hate and loathing” on their platforms.

Appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union” last Sunday, Schiff told host Jake Tapper that he was concerned over having a “budding, promising new entrant” buy out a social media platform, not to “develop that product line” but to stop competition.

Schiff said Congress should “absolutely take aim” at that and “other anti-competitive actions of Big Tech.”

Schiff claimed that there is a “big problem right now” with social media platforms failing to “moderate content.” He said Twitter was experiencing an “explosion of hate” while it is “banning” journalists from the platform.

Of course, the “journalists” weren’t banned; they were suspended for violating Twitter’s Terms of Service, which is part of how Twitter moderates content. All of the supposed “journalists” who were temporarily suspended for violating the terms of service have had their accounts restored.

On Section 230, Schiff told Jake Tapper that he didn’t think social media companies should “enjoy an immunity from liability when they behave this way.” He said while the government can’t tell social media companies what content they can and cannot have on their platforms, the government did give them immunity provided they are “responsible moderators of content.”

Since social media platforms haven’t been responsibly moderating content the way he likes, Schiff explained, “why should they continue to enjoy that immunity from responsibility and liability?”

Watch HERE.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act grants online platforms immunity from civil liability for third-party content posted on their platforms. It also permits social media platforms to moderate content by creating their own standard terms of service which would allow them to remove posts, provided they are acting in “good faith.”