Post #2590437

2026-04-02 01:16 UTC

@josh@social.joshtriplett.org @Casey@theforkiverse.com section 230 states that platforms are not responsible for user-generated content since they do not perform an editorial role. But clearly the For You feed algorithm seems editorial. I propose a new rule: Platforms are not responsible for user-generated speech. But platforms are responsible for what speech they show you via their algorithms. Reverse chronological feed of people you follow is exempt, as is search results.

Replies (2)

@josh@social.joshtriplett.org 2026-04-02 01:23

I'd want to be a bit broader than "must be reverse-chronological" (e.g. let's not require a legislative update to add creative things like "show me a subset list of people I've curated" or "show me posts with this tag I specifically bookmarked"), and I don't especially think Section 230 is the right tool for this, but the general *concept* of "restrict algorithmic-optimization-for-engagement-and-enragement" seems sound.

Open ##2590438
@Captcha@theforkiverse.com 2026-04-02 01:23

@josh@social.joshtriplett.org @Casey@theforkiverse.com Still trying tease out the exact wording of this distinction (personalized feed? Boosted content?, promoted content?), but the For You seems actively editorialized by the platform and passive consumed by the user, where as the other two seem actively sought out by the user. Also protects smaller platforms (if they don't algorithmize), and messaging apps, and promotes healthier user experience...

Open ##2590440