Both Zuckerberg of Facebook and Dorsey of Twitter have opposed any changes that may dictate content. Both of them, along with the lawmakers., have agreed on the need to make necessary changes in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 1996. This section provides immunity for website publishers from third party content. Section 230 was developed to allow these technologies to flourish. You cannot make social media liable for what somebody else said or what they felt or did. In that case, these companies would probably never have been in existence.

Section 230 can be changed to incentivise social media to set some standards. Some of the concerns have to be addressed. These focus on services that decide to moderate or remove content. Section 230 could be expanded. There could be new legislative frameworks or commitment to best regulatory practices. Moderation process and practices are to be published. There should be provision for appealing process. Suggestions could be invited regarding the concerns around algorithmic choice. Thus they supported reforming Section 230 but opposed government regulation.

As these platforms are new, the regulatory model cannot be the same as that for the publishing industry or telecom industry. Social media do not create content, and do not choose up front what they publish. Of course, they have responsibilities. They deserve their own kind of regulatory framework.