For consumers today, it’s hard to remember a time when the internet wasn’t such an integral part of daily life, helping them shop, work, and communicate with one another. But thirty years ago, on February 8, 1996, Section 230, also known as “the twenty-six words that created the internet”, was signed into law as part of the Telecommunications Act.
This week, as we celebrate its 30th anniversary, it’s worth looking back at how this simple yet critical piece of legislation fundamentally shaped the digital lives of billions of consumers for the better.
To better understand its impact, it’s important to remember why it was needed. Back in the 1990s, the law didn’t quite know how to handle businesses operating in the digital medium in an otherwise analog world. Two major court cases demonstrated just how difficult it was to navigate the digital ecosystem as an interactive service provider. On the one hand, there was Cubby v. CompuServe, where CompuServe was sued for a defamatory post found on one of its forums. In that instance, the court found that since CompuServe didn’t engage in any moderation of the posts found on its site, they couldn’t be sued.
On the other hand, in 1995, in Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy, a different outcome occurred. For consumers who are fans of the silver screen, the Martin Scorsese film, The Wolf of Wall Street, covers the story of the very firm driving this litigation. Prodigy was known for aiming to be a family-friendly service, utilizing a combination of tools and human moderators to remove offensive content on its site. In that case, they were also sued for alleged defamation because a user posted on one of their forums, accusing Stratton Oakmont of engaging in criminal acts related to a stock IPO for Steve Madden. But because Statton Oakmont engaged in some basic screening to keep their site family-friendly, they were treated like a publisher, and found liable for the words of their user (even though the user was correct with their accusations!).
This created what was famously known as the moderator’s dilemma. Platforms could do nothing, inviting all kinds of terrible content on their websites, significantly stunting their ability to grow, but face no legal liability, or engage in clean-up efforts, and face massive liability for things the company itself wasn’t directly even doing or saying. Congress at the time recognized the clear issues with this approach, and Section 230 was born to break that cycle. Allowing websites to curate their website as they saw fit and not be held liable for the speech of others.
Before 1996, the idea of buying a vintage camera from a stranger in another state or booking a stay in someone’s spare bedroom felt like a recipe for disaster. How do you trust a complete random stranger? Section 230 changed that calculus.
By protecting platforms from being held legally liable for the things users say, the law paved the way for the modern marketplace. It allowed for the creation of the review ecosystem, where users could provide open feedback about their experiences with other individuals and businesses. Whether it is a product review on Amazon or a review of a recent stay at an Airbnb, those instances of user-generated content provide critical information that empowers consumers to make informed decisions. Under a ruling like Stratton Oakmont, getting this type of feedback online would be much more difficult for consumers, as websites would be reticent to host reviews to begin with.
Additionally, Section 230 allowed for websites like eBay and Craigslist, or more recently, Etsy and Shopify, to allow for millions of small businesses to be connected to consumers not just in the United States, but around the world. Section 230 provides the necessary protection so that websites don’t have to worry about the liability associated with what third parties do.
The biggest impact of Section 230 for consumers is its profound impact on empowering them to express themselves online. Similar to many stories we see in tech, Section 230 in many ways served as a disruptor, creating the opportunity needed to challenge the traditional way of doing things across a variety of industries. In the media ecosystem, it shifted power away from the traditional media giants to allow for new media entrants to emerge. The DailyWire, The YoungTurks, Charlie Kirk, Pat McAfee, Barstool Sports, the list goes on and on, were all able to emerge because of the environment that Section 230 created that allowed their perspective to not only be seen but flourish.
Section 230 allows for consumers’ voices to be heard in ways not previously possible. Our work here at the Consumer Choice Center is amplified by being able to advocate on behalf of you through our website, but also on social media platforms like X, YouTube, Instagram, and speaking with both traditional media outlets, as well as new media content creators, about issues you care about. Because websites can host real-time user content, consumers can witness history unfolding live by seeing through the eyes of other users on the ground. Section 230 ensures that platforms can allow those critical conversations and witness historical moments without the risk of litigation meant to silence individuals who are not towing the company line.
Personally, I am grateful for the environment the internet has created for me. In an analog world, connecting usually meant people in your immediate area. However, because of the free and open internet, I can connect with people based on shared interests rather than being stuck in a forced connection because of a shared zipcode. For years, my dad and I have played games with eachother. Every time we pick up a new game to trophy hunt on, we both are scouring YouTube for content creators covering the title so we can get a sense of what a good strategy is for tackling it, and I’d join various Discord communities related to the games to interact with other players.
Alternatively, anyone who knows me knows that over the last couple of years, I have been on a health journey. While there were many real-world reasons I decided to embark on that process, the internet helped me lean into that choice. As a result, I have learned so much about my health, discovered new communities, gyms, products, services, and events that have helped complement my real-world efforts.
While many politicians today try to frame Section 230 as a “gift to big tech”, that statement couldn’t be further from the truth. It was a gift to consumers everywhere. It correctly recognized that technology is a conduit. If a website were to be held liable for anything its users could potentially say, we would have a much quieter online world, and everyone would be worse off.
As we look to the future, the conversation around the internet is going to continue to evolve. I firmly believe that the best is yet to come for the internet, but it’s critical to remember and honor the foundation that makes that brighter future possible.
