I hope this leads to stripping Section 230 protections from social media companies.
Simple as that, you can't have it both ways. I think the provision should also only come into effect above a certain size. We dont want the FCC coming down hard on the petunia enthusiast's forms because they banned someone for starting threads about something other than petunias. And I think reasonable people can agree on the idea of a forum growing large enough to defacto become "public". There is already a legal framework for treating private property as public forums, for example when city councils would meet on private property they couldn't censor discussion just because they weren't on public land.
We understand that feeds curated manually by platform employees doesn't qualify for Section 230 protection, example being any regular newspaper's articles. In case of online platforms, automatically curated feed should be legally similar, given that the automation is wholy created and maintained by the platform, for the express purpose of scaling out their manual processes.
Removing section 230 will remove that platform and return us to the CNN and Fox being the gatekeepers of information I'm afraid.
The better answer is to disallow social media companies to consolidate and monopolize. We already have the laws on the books.
Those are your words not mine. It wouldn't happen overnight, but it wouldn't be recognizable within a year or less.
They would remove almost all content to avoid liability, absolutely. 230 shields them from liability for the content they host (for the most part). It would turn into nothing but network shows and commercials, just like TV was 10-20 years ago.
Here's what EFF describes it, and they support keeping it.
https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
Removing 230 would absolutely be an affront to citizens free speech and freedom to broadcast. I understand why people don't like it, but the alternative (removing it) is much, much worse.
Think of it this way, say you hosted a blog on your own server and you had comments. Now once 230 gets repealed, you are open to lawsuits from anyone concerning any of the comments on your blog, including lawsuits with no merit that you still have to defend. Would you keep comments open? Probably not and even if you did, you probably wouldn't for long for one reason or the other (probably because you were sued).
Hell, HN probably wouldn't even be the same. As soon as someone says x company sucks in a comment, HN is now open to a libel lawsuit, meritless or not. HN would have to decide if hiring full time moderators and a legal team for content would be worth the effort to keep the site up. It might be, but for many, if not most sites, it's not.