Neutral Platforms, Not Publishers: Safeguarding the Digital Space

The expansion of censorship institutions linked to U.S. government funding for disinformation studies at universities poses a significant risk, as their influence is deep-rooted within multiple academic and public sectors. The economic stakes surrounding these funding sources complicate any potential judicial support for First Amendment protections, due to the collateral damage to jobs and livelihoods. The discussion surrounding the reform of Section 230 illustrates the complexities involved in protecting neutral platforms from the liabilities faced by publishers. Repealing or altering this protection could devastate the content moderation industry, akin to the effect of shutting down an entire coal industry in a region. Transition strategies need to be implemented to phase out problematic programs, while ensuring all stakeholders—including government, civil society, and the private sector—are involved in shaping solutions. Long-term education and negotiations are essential to reconcile the disparate interests within political factions. The preeminence of military and governmental disinformation efforts highlights the need for a careful approach that recognizes the entrenched nature of these systems. Despite these challenges, there remains a possibility for fostering positive change if stakeholders engage constructively to address the situation comprehensively.