Read on Twitter
Yesterday, @wired published a giant cover story with the headline "Everything You& #39;ve Heard About Section 230 Is Wrong." Except, that& #39;s not really what the piece is about. It basically cherry picks statements by me, @CathyGellis and @ericgoldman and says *we& #39;re* wrong.
The problem is that it presents our arguments as weak strawmen that are easy to blow over, removing any and all of the context and nuance behind our arguments. I have now written a detailed response. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210506/12170946745/wireds-big-230-piece-has-narrative-to-tell.shtml">https://www.techdirt.com/articles/...
A key point that Cathy, Eric, and myself have tried to stress for years is how much complexity and nuance there is in the debate about 230, and how much of the public discussion ignores the complexity, nuance and context. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210506/12170946745/wireds-big-230-piece-has-narrative-to-tell.shtml">https://www.techdirt.com/articles/...
Unfortunately, the Wired piece does the same, setting up extreme caricatures of our actual positions that makes it easy to dismiss, while failing to probe or challenge views of those who disagree with us (or why their "solutions" aren& #39;t actually solutions).
The one point that some have raised in support of the article is that it makes a point that Canada doesn& #39;t have 230-like protections in statute, and that user generated content is "alive and well" there. This is extremely misleading and wipes out important context.
The "it& #39;s fine" in Canada point removes an AWFUL lot of context and history, which I tried to add back in my response to Wired (this is only a small part of it). https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210506/12170946745/wireds-big-230-piece-has-narrative-to-tell.shtml">https://www.techdirt.com/articles/...
While it& #39;s annoying to feel like my own arguments were misrepresented in the piece, and presented in an unfair light completely devoid of the important context, I think it& #39;s much more concerning that the piece misrepresents the situation with Canada. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210506/12170946745/wireds-big-230-piece-has-narrative-to-tell.shtml">https://www.techdirt.com/articles/...
I tend to expect better of Wired, which historically has been so much better on these kinds of complex topics. I hope that this is not the trend under its new editor, who vehemently defended the piece on Twitter yesterday.
Anyway, I don& #39;t have the marketing budget of Wired/Conde Nast, so my little tweet thread here is the entirety of my "promotion" of my response to Wired. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210506/12170946745/wireds-big-230-piece-has-narrative-to-tell.shtml">https://www.techdirt.com/articles/...
I expect a tiny fraction of those who read the original will read my critique, but I appreciate that Section 230 has helped to enable an open internet where it& #39;s even possible for me to publish such a response, without having to get permission. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210506/12170946745/wireds-big-230-piece-has-narrative-to-tell.shtml">https://www.techdirt.com/articles/...
