5 Content Moderation 5 Content Moderation

5.1 Content Moderation - The Basics 5.1 Content Moderation - The Basics

Guiding Questions

How has the evolution of online content moderation challenged traditional First Amendment frameworks, and what lessons can we draw from cases like Miami Herald v. Tornillo for today's digital platforms?
What role should government play in regulating content moderation practices, given both constitutional constraints and practical challenges of platform governance?
How do different approaches to Section 230 reflect broader tensions between platform autonomy, user rights, and state interests in content regulation?

Guest

Alan Rozenshtein

Required

Facts

[Pages 1-4, 8-9 (enforcement)] David Inserra, A Guide to Content Moderation for Policymakers, Cato (May 21, 2024)
[skim part II, read part IIIA and IIIB pp. 1630-1649] Kate Klonick, The New Governors: The People, Rules, and Processes Governing Online Speech, 131 Harvard Law Review 1598 (2018).
Kenan Malik, The Twitter Files should disturb liberal critics of Elon Musk – and here’s why, The Guardian (Jan. 1, 2023).

Law

Alan Z. Rozenshtein, Section 230 Isn't the First Amendment for the Internet, LAWFARE (Sept. 11, 2024).
[read “Common Interpretation”] Geoffrey R. Stone and Edward H. Levi, Freedom of Speech and the Press, ACC.
[pp. 44-64] NetChoice, L.L.C. v. Paxton, 49 F.4th 439 (5th Cir. 2022).

Application

[pp. 1-6] Moody v. NetChoice, L.L.C., 598 U.S. (2024).
[read Syllabus, read Chief Justice Burger's opinion from Section III (starting at "The challenged statute..." through Section IV “...it is so ordered"] Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241 (1974).

Optional

Kyle Langvardt and Alan Z. Rozenshtein, Moody v. NetChoice is a Blow to Silicon Valley’s Litigation Strategy, LAWFARE (Jul. 26, 2024).
Susanna Granieri, Eugene Volokh on Section 230, Generative AI and the First Amendment, FIRST AMEND. WATCH (July 23, 2024).

Guiding Questions

How do technical limitations of automated content moderation systems interact with legal requirements and policy goals? What implications does this have for regulation?
How are different jurisdictions (particularly the US and EU) approaching content moderation regulation, and what are the global implications of these varying approaches?
How should platforms balance competing interests when moderating potentially harmful content - particularly when dealing with content that may be both harmful and newsworthy, or when automated systems face accuracy challenges?

Guest

Jane Bambauer

Required

Facts

Law

Application

[skim. 24-33, read 33-38, skim 38-55] TikTok Inc. & ByteDance Ltd. v. Garland, Nos. 24-1113, 24-1130 & 24-1183 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 6, 2024) (slip op.).
Bill Echikson, Europe Struggles to Enforce New Free Speech Rules, Center for European Policy Analysis (Aug. 28, 2024).

Optional

Guiding Questions

How should we balance First Amendment protections with efforts to combat election-related misinformation, particularly when considering new technologies like AI-generated content?
What are the relative merits of different regulatory approaches to election-related content (e.g., disclosure requirements, outright bans, or platform self-regulation), and how do these approaches vary across jurisdictions?
To what extent should platforms be responsible for preventing electoral manipulation through their services, and what tools (technical, legal, or policy) are most effective for this purpose?

Guest

Josh Lawson

Facts