Content. Section 230 of the commune cases decency act has enabled that echo system to involve by giving online companys the ability to moderate content without equating them to the publisher or speaker of that content. Weve been able the creation of millions and billions of people to come together and interact. Today, this committee will be examining that world that section 230 has enabled both the good and the bad. Id like to thank the witnesses for appearing before us today. Each of you represents important perspective related to the content and the ecosystem. Ony of you bring up concerns this complex issue. I agree this is a complex issue. Regulate y should disinformation and hate speech. Like too many communities my hometown of pittsburgh has seen what unchecked hate can lead to. Almost a year ago, our community suffered the most deadly attack on Jewish Americans in our nations history. The shooter did so after posting antisemitic comments before finally posting that he was in. A similar attack occurred in new zealand. And the gunman streamed his despicable acts on social media sights. Many websites didnt move fast enough. And the algorithms help to make celebrity selfies go viral, help expose a heinous act. In 2015 we saw similar issues when foreign adversaries use it to disseminate disinformation and foment doubt to instill trust in our leaders and institutions. Clearly, we all need to do better. And i would strongly encourage the witnesses before us that represent these Online Platforms and other major platforms to step up. The other withins on the panel bring up serious concerns with the kind of content available on your platforms. And the impact that that is having on sofmente some of those impacts are very disturbing. You must do more to address these concerns. That being said, section 230 doesnt just protect the largest platforms or the most fringe websites. It enables comment sections on individual blogs, people to leave honest and open reviews and free and open discussion about controversial going tos. The kind of ecoo system that has been enabled hasnt riched our lives and our democracy. The ability of individuals to have voices heard particularly marginalized communities cannot be understated. The ability of people to post content that speaks truth to ower has created political moments that have changed the world we live in. We need to recognize the incredible power they have for good. Want to thank you, again, for being here. I like to yield the balance of my time to my good friend ms. Mastui. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank the witnesses. In 2018 Mark Zuckerburg said it was my mistake and im sorry. In allowing russia to influence the 2016 president ial election. Fast forward 555 days. Has that mr. Zuckerberg not learned from his mistakes. They will continue to add ads as they push falsehoods and lines. Making it fertile grounds for election and interference in 2010. The decision should not be a difficult one. The choice between deep fakes, hate speech, online bullies and a fabs driven debate should be easy. If facebook doesnt want to play referee about the truth and political speech then they should get out of the game. I hope this series introduces a robust discussion because we need it now more than ever. Mr. Chairman. I yield back. Turks gentlelady yields back. We recognize mr. Latta for five minutes for his Opening Statement. Thank you very much to our witnesses for apeering before us. Quen welcome to the hearing on content moderation in section 230 of the commune they r cases of decency act. We began last session how congress should examine the law. Accountability. And transparency first the hundreds of millionses of americans using the internet today. Were closely tied to section 230. They range from large to Small Companies as well as academics and researchers. Let me be clear, im not advocating that Congress Repeal lead w or rich that could to the death of a thousand cups s. Before we discuss whether they should make modifications of law, i we should understand how we got to this point. Its important to realize that when it was written the telecomm portion included other pro biggses on on jex or lewd contact. Provisions that were written were autably struck down by the supreme court. But the section 230 provisions remain. Cda Interactive Computer Services. Miracle online, proactively take down the content. Content as chris stateded on the house floor, we want to encourage people like prodigy like america online, like the new mike soft network to do Everything Possible for us, the consumer to help us control at the front door of our house. What comes in and what our children see. It is unfortunate that they have such a broad interpretations similarly without platforms having to demonstrate that they are doing Everything Possible. The congressman visioned. Numerous of platforms have hien bhoined the shields and avoid litigation without having to take the responsibility. Not only are Good Samaritans sometimes selective in taking down harmful or illegal activity. But they have been interpreted so badly that they can skate without accountability. Thats not to say all platforms never use the tools afforded by congress. Many do great things. Many of the bigger platforms, i mean, billions and thats with a b accounts annually. They are the exception not the rule. Today, well dig deeper to remove con dent whether its with the tools provided by section 230 or with their own selfconstructed terms of service. Hould be encouraging encourage this meeting. We can have an open discussion of the intent. Not sure whether they were held reasonably accountability for activity in the platform without drastically affecting the innovative startup. Within, mr. Chairman, i look back at the time. This is a joint hearing between our committee and the committee on Consumer Protection and commerce, and i would like to recognize the chair of that mrs. Ttee for five minutes, cekowsky. Today the internet certainly has improved our lives in many, many ways. Enabled them to actively participate in sode. Education and commerce. Section 230 of the Communications Decency act has been at the heart of the United States internet policy for over 20 years. Ny say that this law allowed free speech to flourish. Allowing the internet the internet to grow into what it is today. In the early days, it was intended to encourage Online Platforms to moderate usergenerated content. To remove offensive, dangerous or illegal content. The internet has come a long way since the law was first enacted. The amount and fist cation of ser postings has increased exponentially. Unfortunately, the number of americans who report extremism, extreme Online Harassments which stall king,cking bull yig. 37 of users say theyve experienced that this year. Likewise, extreme extremism, hate speech. Election interference and the problematic content is pro live rating. The spread of such content is problematic, thats for sure. And actually it causes some real harm that multibillion Dollar Companies like facebook, google, twitter, cant or wont fix. And if this werent enough, cause if this werent enough cause for concern, businesses re attempting to use section 2030 as a ability shield actively that they can that they have nothing to do with Third Party Content or content moderation policy in recent in a recent ashington post article, uber executives seems to be open opening the door to claiming vast immunity. From local traffic liability based on section 2030. Is would represent a major unraveling of 200ee years of ocial contract, communities, governance and the professional intend. At issue the federal commission ction 5 authority and an unfair practice. The student section 5 cases on whether websites are generated content. But the terms of Service Violations for Third Party Content may also be precluded by 230 immunety. I wanted to talk a little bit about injecting 230 into trade agreements. It seems to me that weve already seen that now. And the japan trade agreement and there is a real flush to include that now in the mexico canadau. S. Trade agreement. There is no place for that. I think that the laws in these other countries dont really accommodate, what the United States has done about 230. The other thing we are having a discussion right now. An important commercial about 2 30. And in the midst of that conversation because of all the new developments, i think it is just inappropriate right now at this moment to insert this Liability Protection into into trade agreements. As a member of the working group that is helping to negotiate that agreement, i am pushing hard to make sure that it just isnt there. I dont think we need to have 2030. Ustment to it just shouldnt be in trade agreements. All of the issues that were talking about today indicate that there may be a larger problem, the 2 30, no longer achieving the goal encouraging platforms to protect their users and today, i hope that we can discuss holistic solutions. Not talking about eliminating 2 30, but having a new look at that in the light of the many changes that we are seeing into the world of big tech right now. We want to dish look forward to hearing from our witnesses and how it can be made even better for consumers. And i yield back. Thank you. Gentlelady yields back. The chair recognizes the Ranking Member of the committee. Good morning. Welcome to todays joint hearing on online commerce management. My priority to protect consumers while preserving the ability for Small Businesses and startups to innovate. In that spirit, today we are discussing Online Platforms in section 230 of the Communications Decency act. In the early days of the internet two companies were sued for content, posted on their website by users. One company sought to moderate content on their platform, the other did not. In deciding these cases, the court found the company that did not make content decisions was immune from liability, but the company that moderated content was not. It was after these decisions that congress created section 230. Section 230 is intended to protect, quote, Interactive Computer Services from being sued while also allowing them to moderate content that may be harmful, illicit or illegal. Harmful illicit or illegal. This Liability Protection plated critical and Important Role in how we regulate the internet. To allow Small Businesses and integrators to thrive online without the fear of regrowth loss are looking to make a quick buck. Section 230 is also largely misunderstood. Congress never intended to provide immunity only to websites who are neutral. Congress never wanted platforms to simply be neutral conduits but in fact wanted platforms to moderate content. The Liability Protection extended to allow platforms to make good faith efforts to moderate material that is obscene, loose, excessively violent or harassing. There is supposed to be a balance to section 230. Small Internet Companies enjoy a safe harbor to innovate and force online while also Incentivizing Companies to keep the internet clear of offensive and violent content by empowering these platforms to act and clean up their own site. The internet revie revolutionize freedom of speech by providing a platform for every american to have their voice heard and to access an infinite amount of information at their fingertips. Medium and other online blogs provided a platform for anyone to write. Wikipedia provides free indepth information on almost any topic you can imagine through mostly user generated and moderated content. Companies that started in dorm rooms and garages are now global powerhouses. We take great pride in being the Global Leader in tech and innovation. But while some of our Biggest Companies have grown, have they mature . Today is often difficult to go online without seeing harmful, disgusting or illegal content. To be clear i fully support free speech which society benefits from open dialogue and Free Expression online. I know there has been calls for Big Government to mandate or dictate free speech or ensure fairness online and is coming from both sides of the aisle. I share similar concerns that others have expressed and are driving some of the policy proposals, i do not believe these are consistent with the first amendment. Republicans successfully fought to repeal the fcc fairness doctrine for broadcast regulation during the 1980s. I strongly caution against advocating for similar doctrine online. It should not be the fcc, ftc or any Government Agency job to moderate freespeech online. It instead we should continue to provide oversight of big tech in their use of section 230 and encourage structure of content. This is very. How do we ensure they are responsibly earning their Liability Protection. We Want Companies to benefit not only from the shield but also use the sword congress afforded them to rid their sites of harmful content. I understand its a delicate issue and certainly we renew them. I want to be very clear im not forgetting section 230, its for consumers and entities in the internet echo system. Misguided and hasty attempts to amend or repeal section 230 for biased or other reasons could have unintended consequences were free speech and ability for Small Businesses to provide new and innovative services. At the same time it is clear we reached a point where its income it upon us as policymakers have a serious and thoughtful discussion about achieving the balance on section 230. I thank you for the time and i yield back. The chair recognizes chairman of the committee for five minutes for his Opening Statement. Thank you chairman. The intermittent is one of the single greatest Human Innovations that expresses community and Economic Opportunity with trains of dollars of exchanged online every year. One of the principal laws that pave the way for the internet to flourish is section 230 of the communication decency act which is part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. We enacted the section to give platforms the ability to moderate their sites and protect consumers without excessive risk of litigation and to be clear section 230 has been an incredible success. In the 20 years since section 230 was law the internet is more complex and sophisticated the 1986 the Global Internet reached 36 million users, less than 1 of the world population. Only one in four americans reported going online every day. Compare that to now when all of us are online almost every hour that we are not sleeping in earlier this year the internet passed 4. 39 billion users worldwide. Here in the u. S. Theres about 230 million smart phones that provide americans access to Online Platforms. The internet is a central part of our economic fabric in a way that we cannot have dreamed up when we passed the Telecommunications Act. With that complexity and growth we have seen the darker side of the internet growth. Online radicalization has spread leading to Mass Shootings in the schools, churches and movie theaters, International Terrorists are using the internet to groom recruits. Platforms have been used for the illegal sale of drugs including those that spark the Opioid Epidemic. Foreign governments and fraudsters to polluted campaigns using new Technology Like deep fakes designed for civil unrest and disrupt democratic elections. There are constant attacks against women, people of color and other minority groups. Perhaps most despicable of all is the horrendous sexual exportation of children online. In 1998 there were 3000 reports of material depicted in the children online. Last year 45 million video reports were made. While platforms are now better detecting and removing this material recent reporting shows Law Enforcement officers are overwhelmed by the crisis. These are issues that we cannot ignore in Tech Companies need to step up with new tools to address the Serious Problems in each of these issues demonstrate how online content moderation have not stay true to the values underlying section 230 and has not kept pace at the increasing importance of the goebel internet. There is no easy solution to keep this content off the internet as policymakers we have are ideas of how we might tackle the symptoms, the content moderation online and also protect free speech but we must seek to fully understand the breadth and depth of the internet today, how it is changed and how it can be made better and we have to be thoughtful, careful and bipartisan in our approach. Its with that in mind i was disappointed that investor lighthizer, u. S. Trade representative refused to testify today,