Ending Section 230, incrementally or all in one go, has been increasingly on the minds of politicians (mostly but not exclusively conservative ones) for some time now. There's a lot more to EARN IT than just that, but some of them will vote for anything that increases the liability exposure of anyone hosting anything online.
All section 230 does is make it so that "platforms" can remove posts it doesn't like without needing to assume liability for every other posts. Unless they think Twitter is going to hire a few million employees to screen every post, Twitter and the rest would simply turn off the platform to anyone who isn't verified or doesn't otherwise sign a waiver releasing twitter of that liability (which was possible before CDA, as well, but nobody wanted to introduce that sort of barrier to social media/forums back then).
Section 230 is from 1996. For reference myspace launched in 2003. It has been modified since, but not in a way relative to this discussion. Section 230 classifies providers such as Facebook and Twitter as "interactive computer services" and not "information content providers." This protects them from lawsuits based on the content they provide.
I'm not arguing that Facebook should be held to the same standard as the person who creates the content. However, when Facebook services misinformation on COVID with negligent moderation or even intentional promotion, or they allow eighty thousand posts by Russian Internet Research Agency (IRA)-controlled accounts in two years near an election, reaching 126 million users [1 (Mueller Report)], maybe there needs to be some amendment. Perhaps not completely recategorizing Facebook, but adding some more responsibilities on these major platforms to at least not promote bad information, polarizing content, and information campaigns from foreign governments. When I did some research into how to disincentivize social media companies from spreading misinformation, reforming 230 was the best option I saw.
Edit: I posted a more detailed version of this elsewhere on this thread to provide more background. Then I realized I couldn't delete this abridged version.
I agree. My final recommendation was to treat them with the same responsibilities as media companies which still have a lot of protection, but not as many protections as social media companies.
