Carr Says FCC Should Be Able to Move Now to Provide Clarity on Section 230 Rules

be under Republican control through Jan. 20. The Senate approved Republican Nathan Simington Tuesday, largely based on his stance on the issue (see 2012080067). A deadlocked 2-2 FCC would be unlikely to overturn a late declaratory ruling, industry experts said. “I would certainly welcome the commission moving forward on Section 230 reform,” Carr said. “The debate about whether there should be reforms of Section 230, whether the status quo has it exactly right, that debate is effectively over,” he said: “There is now bipartisan agreement, broad and deep, that the status quo isn’t working.” The big question is when speech is taken down by a platform pursuant to First Amendment rights, “does that takedown fall within the extra protections you get with 230 or not?” he said. “That’s a question that’s a narrow one” and one “the FCC can and should address.” The focus should be on 230(c)(2), which covers civil liability, rather than (c)(1), which covers the treatment of a publisher or speaker, he said. The FCC shouldn’t be “the speech police,” he said. “I don’t see a path to the FCC forcing people to carry speech.” Carr cited a series of tweets from TechFreedom Senior Fellow Berin Szoka on an interpretive order as a likely path to FCC action before Chairman Ajit Pai leaves. The FCC and Democratic commissioners didn't comment. Commissioners Jessica Rosenworcel and Geoffrey Starks have opposed FCC action. "The FCC should reject NTIA’s proposals and focus on bridging the digital divide,” Starks said in September testimony before the House Commerce Committee. Congress is exploring legislation on the liability shield (see 2012100072).