Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Going Rushk-Off on 230 (ft. Doug Rushkoff)
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Going Rushk-Off on 230 (ft. Doug Rushkoff)
Chapters00:00 Introduction to Section 230 and Online Speech02:57 Government Regulation and Online Platforms06:10 Marketplace of Ideas and Section 23009:09 Ethics in Platform Development12:01 Impact of Section 230 on Media Monopolies15:16 Reforming Section 230 for a Better Internet18:11 Balancing Speech Rights on Social Media21:03 Final Thoughts on Censorship and Free SpeechSummaryThis conversation and interview with Queens College media studies professor Doug Rushkoff delves into the complexities of Section 230 and its implications for online speech, government regulation, and the ethical responsibilities of social media platforms. The discussion highlights the evolving nature of the marketplace of ideas, the impact of Section 230 on media monopolies, and the need for reform to ensure a balanced approach to free speech and censorship.TakeawaysThe role of government in regulating online speech is nuanced and platform-dependent.Section 230 provides immunity to platforms but raises questions about their responsibilities as publishers.The concept of a marketplace of ideas is evolving with the rise of social media.Ethics in platform development should prioritize user agency and societal impact.Reforming Section 230 could enhance free speech by reducing algorithmic censorship.Media monopolies have been facilitated by the lack of regulation under Section 230.Platforms should be transparent about their algorithms and content moderation practices.Censorship and free speech issues are more complex than they appear.Students and future tech professionals should advocate for ethical practices in technology.The conversation emphasizes the importance of questioning the narratives set by social media companies.Sound Bites“I’ve never liked the term ‘marketplace of ideas,’ because it assumes ideas are in a marketplace”“It’s tricky; I don’t have a one-size-fits-all opinion, it depends”"Who should decide what speech is harmful?""Section 230 freed internet service providers."“A platform just holds stuff”“Once platforms became publishers, once they had algorithms choosing what you see, they should’ve been forced to take on the responsibilities of publishing”“The internet came and ideas spread in a more viral, lateral, horizontal way”"How do we think about ethics in moderation?""What would meaningful reform look like?"
View all episodes
Chapters00:00 Introduction to Section 230 and Online Speech02:57 Government Regulation and Online Platforms06:10 Marketplace of Ideas and Section 23009:09 Ethics in Platform Development12:01 Impact of Section 230 on Media Monopolies15:16 Reforming Section 230 for a Better Internet18:11 Balancing Speech Rights on Social Media21:03 Final Thoughts on Censorship and Free SpeechSummaryThis conversation and interview with Queens College media studies professor Doug Rushkoff delves into the complexities of Section 230 and its implications for online speech, government regulation, and the ethical responsibilities of social media platforms. The discussion highlights the evolving nature of the marketplace of ideas, the impact of Section 230 on media monopolies, and the need for reform to ensure a balanced approach to free speech and censorship.TakeawaysThe role of government in regulating online speech is nuanced and platform-dependent.Section 230 provides immunity to platforms but raises questions about their responsibilities as publishers.The concept of a marketplace of ideas is evolving with the rise of social media.Ethics in platform development should prioritize user agency and societal impact.Reforming Section 230 could enhance free speech by reducing algorithmic censorship.Media monopolies have been facilitated by the lack of regulation under Section 230.Platforms should be transparent about their algorithms and content moderation practices.Censorship and free speech issues are more complex than they appear.Students and future tech professionals should advocate for ethical practices in technology.The conversation emphasizes the importance of questioning the narratives set by social media companies.Sound Bites“I’ve never liked the term ‘marketplace of ideas,’ because it assumes ideas are in a marketplace”“It’s tricky; I don’t have a one-size-fits-all opinion, it depends”"Who should decide what speech is harmful?""Section 230 freed internet service providers."“A platform just holds stuff”“Once platforms became publishers, once they had algorithms choosing what you see, they should’ve been forced to take on the responsibilities of publishing”“The internet came and ideas spread in a more viral, lateral, horizontal way”"How do we think about ethics in moderation?""What would meaningful reform look like?"