Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Social Media
  3. News

Sen. Ron Wyden: Trump wants to force Twitter to ‘play host to his lying’

Add as a preferred source on Google
 

President Donald Trump signed an executive order last week that’s aimed at regulating social media companies, claiming that Twitter, Facebook, and other online platforms are the enemies of free speech.

But Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) doesn’t buy it.

Recommended Videos

“[Trump] wants to force private businesses to play host to his lying,” Wyden told Digital Trends.

As the co-author of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — the specific law at which Trump’s executive order takes aim — Wyden knows better than most what the law is designed to protect. Wyden sees Trump’s order as a thinly veiled attempt to recast Section 230 as a troublesome loophole, rather than the pillar of online freedom that it is.

Wyden recently sat down for a Digital Trends interview to set the record straight.

It’s not about being ‘neutral’

Much of Trump’s order is predicated on the idea that social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook are required to be neutral, and that it’s problematic to let them selectively censor voices on one side of the political spectrum more than the other (which, for the record, studies have found isn’t happening).

“In a country that has long cherished the freedom of expression, we cannot allow a limited number of online platforms to handpick the speech that Americans may access and convey on the internet,” Trump said in his executive order. “This practice is fundamentally un-American and anti-democratic. When large, powerful social media companies censor opinions with which they disagree, they exercise a dangerous power. Twitter now selectively decides to place a warning label on certain tweets in a manner that clearly reflects political bias.”

But Wyden underscored that Section 230 has never been about neutrality:

“It is just preposterous that anyone would say that our law requires neutrality,” he said in an interview with Digital Trends. “You don’t see anything in the statute resembling a requirement for neutrality. The whole point was to say that there could be conservative websites and there could be progressive websites and we would basically let the marketplace decide what areas people might want to pay attention to. And this idea that somehow this requires neutrality is just completely false.”

In fact, the law itself doesn’t contain the word neutrality anywhere. And that’s by design. Mentioning neutrality “would have run contrary to our whole philosophy.” Wyden said. “Once you start talking about neutrality, then you’re starting down this path of police and government speech control. It just is a prescription for trouble. And that’s why we avoided it.”

What the law does state is that “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” In other words, platforms can’t be held liable for things that users post, and are free to moderate as they see fit.

“What we basically said,” Wyden explained, “is that you could moderate and curate some content and you could leave some up. That was the point of the law.”

Working the refs

Another misconception that Wyden wants to clear up is that Trump’s order changes the law in some way. That’s simply not how things work in the United States. Ultimately, the power to repeal or change Section 230 lies with Congress.

But while the executive order doesn’t affect the law, it does force companies like Facebook, Twitter, and others to engage in a legal battle to stop it from becoming a law in the future. And in Wyden’s eyes, that’s precisely the point.

“Donald Trump knows what he is proposing is illegal, but what he’s trying to do is what basketball players call working the refs,” Wyden told Digital Trends. “The idea is to put as much pressure on those companies to make them think he’s going to drag them here and push him there or do something which makes their life unbearable. And so he’s trying, as I would say, to ‘work the refs’ and try to force them to change their behavior.”

So while Section 230 isn’t going to disappear anytime soon, the mere threat of repealing it will likely have an impact on how social media companies operate.

I’ll just cut to the bottom line,” Wyden said. “What Donald Trump wants to do is he wants to force private businesses to play host to his lying.”

Want more news, reviews, guides, and features from Digital Trends? Follow us on Apple News, Google News, and Flipboard.

Drew Prindle
Former Senior Editor, Features
Drew Prindle is an award-winning writer, editor, and storyteller who currently serves as Senior Features Editor for Digital…
Instagram will limit reach for AI influencers who skip AI-generated label on their profile
Instagram tightens AI influencer disclosure rules with a clearer profile label
instagram-ai-generated-profiles

Instagram just drew a hard line around AI influencers pretending to be real people. The platform is renaming its old AI creator label to AI-generated profile, and this time it comes with penalties too. Accounts featuring a fully AI-generated person will see their reach cut if they skip the label, meaning your feed is about to get a lot more honest about who is actually behind the account.

So what counts as an AI-generated profile?

Read more
Bluesky now has a feature to save you from accidentally going viral. I want it everywhere.
Bluesky now lets users opt out of its algorithmic Discover feed.
Social profile page of Bluesky.

There's a specific kind of dread that comes with posting something small and watching it explode to a million strangers who missed all the context. Thankfully, Bluesky just built an escape hatch to avoid this horror. The platform now lets you opt out of its algorithmic Discover feed, meaning your posts stop getting pushed to people who don't already follow you.

How Bluesky's algorithmic opt-out feature works

Read more
Meta’s new teen restrictions will only apply to users in the US for now
Facebook and Instagram teens are getting new limits on screen time and content
Facebook logo on iPhone

Meta is implementing new restrictions on U.S. teens who use Facebook and Instagram, but the changes could have repercussions far beyond U.S. screens. Meta’s new protections come after a series of settlements relating to allegations that social media sites endanger children, with the company facing as much as $18 billion in expenses.

For now, the new rules will be applied only to U.S. users. The measures include limitations on how long younger users can spend on Meta’s apps and limits on their ability to disable certain safety settings, Bloomberg reported. The company says it will watch the changes and continue discussions with governments elsewhere.

Read more