Content moderation is, as ever, an interesting, contentious, and fast-paced policy area. TechFreedom’s Corbin Barthold, Andy Jung, and Santana Boulton sit down for a late-summer content moderation news roundup. They cover (among other things) Andy’s recent article on AB 2408, a misguided attempt by California to combat teenage social media addiction; YouTube’s recent Supreme Court brief in Gonzalez v. Google, a case about whether Section 230 protects algorithmic recommendations (spoiler alert: it does); Santana’s essay arguing that algorithms are speech protected by the First Amendment; and Corbin’s recent piece in Techdirt, “Two Dogmas of the Free Speech Panic,” a response to those who equate content moderation with “censorship.”
Content moderation is, as ever, an interesting, contentious, and fast-paced policy area. TechFreedom’s Corbin Barthold, Andy Jung, and Santana Boulton sit down for a late-summer content moderation news roundup. They cover (among other things) Andy’s recent article on AB 2408, a misguided attempt by California to combat teenage social media addiction; YouTube’s recent Supreme Court brief in Gonzalez v. Google, a case about whether Section 230 protects algorithmic recommendations (spoiler alert: it does); Santana’s essay arguing that algorithms are speech protected by the First Amendment; and Corbin’s recent piece in Techdirt, “Two Dogmas of the Free Speech Panic,” a response to those who equate content moderation with “censorship.”