Share
BBC Radio 5 live’s award winning gaming podcast, discussing the world of video games and games culture.
…
continue reading
Manage episode 355204657 series 2676306
Content provided by Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) — The Leading Think Tank for Science and Tech Policy, Information Technology, Innovation Foundation (ITIF) — The Leading Think Tank for Science, and Tech Policy. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) — The Leading Think Tank for Science and Tech Policy, Information Technology, Innovation Foundation (ITIF) — The Leading Think Tank for Science, and Tech Policy or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://staging.podcastplayer.com/legal.
Google doesn’t create terrorist propaganda videos, doesn’t allow them on YouTube, and takes them down as fast as it can when extremist groups post them anyway. But a question now before the Supreme Court is whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects Google and other platform operators from liability if their algorithms end up spreading harmful content. To parse the potential ramifications, Rob and Jackie sat down with Senior Policy Analyst Ashley Johnson, one of ITIF’s resident experts on Internet policy issues such as privacy, security, and platform regulation.
Mentioned
- Robert D. Atkinson. “A Policymaker’s Guide to the ‘Techlash’—What It Is and Why It’s a Threat to Growth and Progress” (ITIF, October 2019).
Related
- Ashley Johnson, “If the Supreme Court Limits Section 230, It Will Change the Way the Internet Functions” (ITIF, February 2023).
- Ashley Johnson. “Section 230 Still Isn’t the Solution to Conservative Claims of Social Media Censorship” (ITIF, December 2022).
102 episodes
))
