[wbl]

IANAL but The First Amdment, not Section 230, is what lets me say that Donald Trump is in league with reptilians to enslave all Americans who prefer pork to beef.

Facebook spreading the above, or other similarly ludicrous information, is likewise protected.

[dragonwriter]

> IANAL but The First Amdment, not Section 230, is what lets me say that Donald Trump is in league with reptilians to enslave all Americans who prefer pork to beef.

The First Amendment does not protect you saying that if it is false and you have knowledge that it is false or are grossly reckless in saying it without confirming its veracity, see, New York Times v. Sullivan.

Section 230 is what prevents Facebook from sharing your liability, as a publisher, if they relay your saying that in the conditions in which you would be liable for defamation.

[wbl]

Have you seen the "Eat Shit Bob" episode of John Oliver? They say many not true things about a coal executive, all harmful to his reputation. But no serious person could take them at all to be truthful. And he isn't even the President.

Section 230 repeal would just mean lawyers name Facebook under rule of the deepest pockets. It doesn't stop Facebook from saying things about politicians.