Writers: It no longer makes sense to speak of free speech in traditional terms

US lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are questioning Section 230 , the liability shield that enshrined the ad-driven internet.

Authors: The new speech is governed by the allocation of virality; people cannot simply speak for themselves.

They ask: When the logic of speech must shift in order for people to be heard, is that still free speech? The time may be right for a legal and policy reset.

David Rothkopf : Section 230's liability shield effectively gives tech companies carte blanche for self-serving behavior.

He says a post-230 world could be a world of hope and renewal worth inhabiting in a new era.

He argues that social media companies should uphold the First Amendment and the courts would finally develop precedents and tests to help them do that.

Rosenberg : Social media companies are common carriers, but they are not common companies that preceded them.

Section 230 might have been considered more a target for reform rather than repeal prior to the advent of generative AI , it can no longer be so.

People want more from AI than entertainment, and the best AI will come out of a society that prioritizes quality communication.

The attention-grooming model fostered by Section 230 leads to stupendous quantities of poor-quality data.