This is the "Section 230" that has so many people in an uproar:
(c) Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker
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.
(2) Civil liability
No provider or user of an
interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
(B) any action taken to enable or make available to
information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).
47 USC sec. 230(c).
This is what the crazy fat kid wants repealed.
Here's the problem. If 230 is repealed, social media sites will be liable as publishers for anything users say, just like a newspaper can be held liable for what its reporters or columnists say, or a TV network can be held liable for what people say on the air.