
This week, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg proposed that Congress make revisions to federal internet regulations that would require platforms to have systems in place for identifying and removing unlawful content.
The proposal, which Zuckerberg presented during his testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Thursday, March 25, would raise the bar for social media companies that are currently granted immunity from liability for the content that appears on their platforms. That immunity, granted by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, has come under fire in recent years from Republicans and Democrats.
While meant to ensure that companies are taking action against unlawful content, the changes could theoretically shore up Facebook’s power, as well as that of other internet giants like Google, by requiring smaller social media companies and startups to develop robust content moderation systems that can be costly.
“Instead of being granted immunity, platforms should be required to demonstrate that they have systems in place for identifying unlawful content and removing it,” Zuckerberg said in his opening remarks, according to written testimony released on the House Committee website Wednesday.
Under Section 230, Facebook, Google, and other internet giants bear no legal liability for content that appears on their platforms. Zuckerberg’s proposal would keep those protections in place, but would make platforms liable for having systems to protect against unlawful content.
“Platforms should not be held liable if a particular piece of content evades its detection — that would be impractical for platforms with billions of posts per day — but they should be required to have adequate systems in place to address unlawful content,” he said, according to the written testimony.
Featured News
Italy’s Antitrust Regulator Investigates State Railway Operators for Market Abuse
Mar 23, 2025 by
CPI
Democrats Urge Trump to Reinstate Ousted FTC Commissioners
Mar 23, 2025 by
CPI
White House-Led Talks Focus on U.S. Investor Takeover of TikTok
Mar 23, 2025 by
CPI
Oregon Lawmakers Target Algorithmic Price-Fixing in Rental Market
Mar 23, 2025 by
CPI
New Merger Disclosure Rules Double Review Time, Complicate Deal Process
Mar 23, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Self-Preferencing
Feb 26, 2025 by
CPI
Platform Self-Preferencing: Focusing the Policy Debate
Feb 26, 2025 by
Michael Katz
Weaponized Opacity: Self-Preferencing in Digital Audience Measurement
Feb 26, 2025 by
Thomas Hoppner & Philipp Westerhoff
Self-Preferencing: An Economic Literature-Based Assessment Advocating a Case-By-Case Approach and Compliance Requirements
Feb 26, 2025 by
Patrice Bougette & Frederic Marty
Self-Preferencing in Adjacent Markets
Feb 26, 2025 by
Muxin Li