{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://www.capito.senate.gov/news/press-releases/video-capito-questions-big-tech-ceos-about-freedom-of-speech-section-230", "VIDEO: Capito Questions Big Tech CEOs About Freedom of Speech, Section 230Read More", "2020-10-28", "2020", "2020-10", "Republican", "House", "WV", "Shelley Capito", "C001047", "www.capito.senate.gov", null, null, "legacy", "CHARLESTON, W.Va. \u2013 U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) today participated virtually in a Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing entitled \u201cDoes Section 230\u2019s Sweeping Immunity Enable Big Tech Bad Behavior?\u201d During the hearing, Senator Capito and Committee members heard from Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, and Facebook Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg.\n\nThe hearing examined legislative proposals to modernize the decades-old law, increase transparency and accountability among big technology companies for their content moderation practices, and explore the impact of large ad-tech platforms on local journalism and consumer privacy. The hearing also provided an opportunity to discuss the unintended consequences of Section 230\u2019s liability shield and how best to preserve the internet as a forum for open discourse.\n\nLast week, Senator Capito spoke directly with Mark Zuckerberg about these issues, as well as broadband deployment in West Virginia. As a result of Senator Capito\u2019s consistent efforts, Facebook has begun building fiber optic cable across the state to connect data centers in Columbus, Ohio and Ashburn, Virginia. Click herefor more details.\n\nHIGHLIGHTS:\n\nON CONTENT MODERATION: \u201cThe topic today is on objectionable content and how you make those judgements\u2026In Section 230, the term is \u2018objectionable content or otherwise objectionable.\u2019 Would you be in favor of redefining that more specifically? That\u2019s awful broad, and that\u2019s where I think many of these questions become very difficult to answer.\u201d\n\nON SECTION 230 HELPING SMALL COMPANIES: \u201cYou\u2019ve expressed the need to have Section 230 protections because of the protections that it gives to small innovators. Well you sit in front of us and I think all of us are wondering how many small innovators are there and what kind of market share could they possibly have when we see the dominance of the three of you? \u2026 How can a small innovator really break through and what does Section 230 really have to do with that ability? I\u2019m skeptical on the argument, quite frankly.\u201d\n\nBACKGROUND:\n\nSection 230 of the Communications Decency Act states, \u201cNo provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider\u201d (47 U.S.C. \u00a7 230). In other words, online platforms such as Facebook or Twitter are not liable for publishing third-party content. While there are important exceptions, Section 230 gives broad protection, allowing online free speech to thrive.\n\n# # #", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-06-28T00:34:36Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://www.capito.senate.gov/news/press-releases/video-capito-questions-big-tech-ceos-about-freedom-of-speech-section-230"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.3770598452538252, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}