Doing away with Section 230 “and really removing a fundamental piece of architecture from the Internet is a really ham-handed blunderbuss way” of trying to address online child exploitation, EFF’s @davidgreene told WVIK.

[eff@mastodon.social]

Doing away with Section 230 “and really removing a fundamental piece of architecture from the Internet is a really ham-handed blunderbuss way” of trying to address online child exploitation, EFF’s @davidgreene told WVIK. https://www.wvik.org/wvik-top-stories/2026-03-25/illinois-and-iowa-us-senators-back-ending-law-that-offers-protections-for-internet-platform-providers-claiming-companies-are-negatively-impacting-children

[unitarybennu@mastodon.social]

@eff @davidgreene it's beyond maddening that "think about the children" shtick is still being employed to this day.

[notthatkindofdoctor@mastodon.social]

@eff @davidgreene
There are like 100 things they could do right now to actually protect children. This is not one of them. Maybe try banning kids from being held in ICE custody, increasing vaccine access, and funding more housing support?

[steve_zeke@freeradical.zone]

@eff @davidgreene

I need “Section 230 for Dummies” to explain the statute and the issues. Something available at eff.org?

I think I get the gist but clarity would be appreciated.