Facebook Is Trying to Look Like the Good Guy on Section 230. Don't Buy It.

Facebook has rolled out a full-blown advocacy campaign for its own regulation. But while it may seem like they're doing what's right, the changes they propose are really designed to help them at the expense of their competition.

Source: Facebook Is Trying to Look Like the Good Guy on Section 230. Don't Buy It. - Foundation for Economic Education

First, it should be quite obvious to everyone on Earth at this point that Facebook is not "the good guy". But in case it isn't, I challenge anyone to find a case where a major corporation lobbied for their own regulation where it was not ultimately to their benefit. You won't find one...

Big companies do this sort of thing all the time. It's done to limit competition and it is a very anti-competitive action. In this case, Facebook is lobbying for a requirement that would hold companies liable for the speech of others...unless said company can prove they have a moderation system in place for such speech. Such a moderation system can be extremely complicated and more importantly expensive. This makes it very difficult for smaller competitors who might not have the resources for this. So in typical fashion, in what is made to sound like reasonable regulation on out of control corporations is just ensuring that said corporation maintains its dominance.

This kind of thing has occurred in the auto industry forever. Most of those "safety" regulations supposedly designed to keep you safe in your vehicle are often lobbied for by major auto makers because in enables them to sell higher priced vehicles and it makes it harder for any potential competitors to come along. Actual safety is a secondary concern. Tesla has finally bucked that trend but how many successful new car makers have there been in the last 50 years or so?

And why do politicians care about Facebook? Mostly they are concerned with insuring whatever speech comes up on Facebook is favorable or beneficial or at least not harmful to their careers. Any law regulating how a company moderates their own sites is a violation of free speech. As a user of their system, people have a right to chose another. That's why I'm posting here and not there. But if regulation makes competition more difficult, it limits one's ability to make other choices. Fortunately, there are plenty of choices now. However, the addition of every regulation tightens the noose just a little more...

H2
H3
H4
3 columns
2 columns
1 column
Join the conversation now
Ecency