From March 18, 2021: On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, the Lawfare Podcast’s miniseries on our online information ecosystem, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Daphne Keller, the director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford's Cyber Policy Center and an expert on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the statute that shields internet platforms from civil liability for third-party content on their websites. The statute has been criticized by both Democrats and Republicans, and both President Trump and President Biden separately called for its repeal. So what should we expect in terms of potential revision of 230 during the current Congress? What does Daphne think about the various proposals on the table? And how is it that so many proposals to reform 230 would be foiled by that pesky First Amendment?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On February 14, the Brookings Institution hosted an event on the upcoming Supreme Court oral arguments in Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh—two cases that could potentially reshape the internet. The Court is set to hear arguments in both cases next week, on February 21 and 22. Depending on how the justices rule, Gonzalez could result in substantial changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the bedrock legal protection on which the internet is built. For today’s podcast, we’re bringing you audio of that discussion. Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic moderated a panel that included Hany Farid, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, with a joint appointment in electrical engineering & computer sciences and the School of Information; Daphne Keller, the director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center; Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein; and Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Daphne Keller, Director of Platform Regulation at Stanford Cyber Policy Center, dives into the implications of the EU’s Digital Services Act on content moderation and freedom of expression. They discuss the complexities of platform compliance and the challenges of auditing social media under new regulations. Keller highlights the philosophical dilemmas around data use, emphasizing the pitfalls of relying solely on metrics to understand human behavior. The conversation also touches on the dynamics between tech giants and regulators, and the evolving landscape of digital governance.

The podcast delves into the Supreme Court oral arguments on NetChoice cases, discussing state regulations on internet platforms, platform challenges, First Amendment rights, and the complexities of content moderation. It explores the implications of state laws on free speech, judicial debates on regulating online platforms, and legal complexities surrounding content regulation and administrative state disputes.

Legal expert Daphne Keller discusses EU Internet regulations and their impact on social media. Topics include content moderation, transparency, platform audits, concerns about government control, and balancing user protections with platform operations. The conversation also explores contrasting US and European approaches to content regulation, challenges for smaller online platforms, combating CSAM, and potential solutions like middleware for decentralized content moderation.