On his last day as President of the United States, Donald Trump attempted to strike down Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which regulates online speech. It was the same law that allowed tech companies like Twitter and Facebook to suspend Trump's social media accounts for his alleged role in the US Capitol Hill violence on January 7 this year.

His successor, Joe Biden, has also called for revocation of the legislation. Over the years, in fact, both the Democrats and Republicans have sought that Section 230 be amended, if not repealed.

So, what is this controversial piece of law all about?

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act was passed in 1996 and provides legal immunity to internet companies for content posted on their websites by users. While the act was introduced to regulate online pornography, Section 230 was an amendment that holds online users responsible for their posts and comments while the platform is immune to lawsuits. The regulation also gives freedom to internet companies to remove content that is in violation of their guidelines and values.

The legislation had been drafted by Democratic Senator Ron Wyden and Republican Congressman Chris Cox to encourage new technology companies as well as to protect free speech. According to Electronic Frontier Foundation, an international digital rights group, Section 230 is "the important law protecting internet speech".

What do the critics say?

Republican leaders, including Trump, have accused online platforms like Twitter and Facebook of showing a clear bias against conservative voices and abusing Section 230 to indulge in selective censorship. Democrats, for their part, argue that the immunity against litigation makes it easier for the internet companies to avoid moderating hate speech, spread of misinformation and other forms of harmful or violent content.

President Biden has sought for immediate revoking of the regulation as it helps digital companies to propagate "falsehoods they know to be false".

Lawmakers have also been debating over narrowing its scope to restrict the kind of content the companies can remove or closely monitor the spread of incendiary content on social media platforms. A few tech companies also seem to be in favour. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has earlier agreed that it makes sense for his company to be liable for some of the content on the platform.

Vociferous support

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, however, continues to advocate in support of Section 230. The Internet Association, an industry group that represents major tech stocks including Google, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft, has suggested that the “best if the internet would disappear” without Section 230 and said attempts to repeal it is a threat to national security.

(Edited by : Jomy)