“Content moderation is the gentle-sounding term used by internet platforms to denote actions they take purportedly to ensure that user-provided content complies with their terms of service and community standards.” states the Supreme Court.
The purpose of this decision is in order to protect the way social media platforms filter and organize their content and data. Even more so, the decision also stipulates the clear difference between internet content and old-fashioned publishers and editors.
This decision made by the Supreme Court follows the need to protect one's creations and speech, making use of the First Amendment “the government cannot get its way just by asserting an interest in better balancing the marketplace of ideas.”.
Even more so, the decision highlights some similar decisions made by Florida and Texas, their purpose being to diminish the manner in which large social media companies operate filter their content, and moderate it on the specific sites.
The law formulation was derived after conservative politicians from both Florida and Texas criticized major social media companies for supposedly having biased content against conservative viewpoints. The tech groups NetChoice and the Computer&Communications Industry Association sued both laws.
As a result, both states come to different conclusions leading to the establishment of the Supreme Court to rule out a decision. The Supreme Court decided that neither state court analyzed the “facial First Amendment challenges” appropriately to the law.
It’s also worth mentioning that the Supreme Court decision regarding the way in which the content is handled in those areas. “When the platforms use their Standards and Guidelines to decide which third-party content those feeds will display, or how the display will be ordered and organized, they are making expressive choices,” stated Justice Elena Kagan.
Also writing that “Contrary to what the Fifth Circuit thought, the current record indicates that the Texas law does regulate speech when applied in the way the parties focused on below — when applied, that is, to prevent Facebook (or YouTube) from using its content-moderation standards to remove, alter, organize, prioritize, or disclaim posts in its News Feed (or homepage)”.
.webp)
