Nearly half of Americans now rely on social media as their primary source of news. Misinformation, disinformation, hate speech, false advertising and conspiracy theories now thrive in an environment optimized for speed, virality and profit — not accuracy, fairness or truth.
There is almost zero accountability and little regulation of Facebook, X, WhatsApp, Instagram, TikTok, Truth Social and dozens of other social media platforms doing business in the United States.
The implications are clear: a society without reliable information is a society vulnerable to manipulation, polarization and authoritarian tendencies. Everyone complains about this downward spiral, but policymakers have so far failed to act with the urgency the crisis demands.
Without a vibrant and accountable press, we cannot solve the urgent problems we face — from Social Security reform to climate change to terrorism. What we need is not only new regulation, but a renewed cultural respect for journalism itself: fact-based, ethical and fearless reporting across print, broadcast and digital platforms.
What’s at stake is not just media reform — but the integrity of democracy itself.
The late David Gergen, former adviser to four U.S. presidents, warned that real local and international news coverage has nearly “reached a vanishing point in the mainstream press.”
These platforms are “free” to users, but the true cost is staggering. They survive on advertising dollars, siphoning away the financial lifeblood of traditional media outlets. Newspapers, once the backbone of democracy and local accountability, are shuttering at historic rates. Local broadcasters are shrinking, investigative reporting is being hollowed out, and news deserts — areas where no local reporting exists — are spreading across the country. Journalism itself, and by extension democracy, is under siege.
A legal problem is the Communications Decency Act’s Section 230, drafted in 1996 to shield online platforms from liability for content posted by users, protecting a fragile, emerging internet. But what made sense in the 1990s no longer fits the reality of trillion-dollar companies wielding unprecedented influence over global communication.
Section 230 currently states that:
“No 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.”
This blanket immunity allows social media giants to profit from harmful or false content without bearing responsibility for its consequences. While Section 230(c)(2) provides “Good Samaritan” protections for platforms that remove obscene or offensive material in good faith, in practice, the law has insulated companies from meaningful accountability.
The internet’s early architects could not have foreseen the dominance of Facebook, TikTok, and X — or the way algorithmic amplification would reward outrage, lies and division over facts and deliberation. Continuing to give these companies special immunity is both outdated and dangerous.
The abuses are now well documented:
Election interference fueled by fake news and bot-driven propaganda. Public health crises are exacerbated by rampant COVID-19 misinformation. Mental health harm as addictive platforms undermine the well-being of children and teens. Extremism and violence are promoted and coordinated openly on unregulated networks. Local journalism is collapsing, as platforms capture ad revenue while investing little in original reporting.So what is Congress doing?
Too little, too slowly. Several bipartisan proposals have emerged — including the Kids Online Safety Act, the American Innovation and Choice Online Act, and bills to amend Section 230 —but most remain stalled amid partisan gridlock and intense lobbying from Big Tech. Hearings have exposed the dangers, but not yet produced comprehensive reform.
Congress must act. Section 230 should be modernized, not abolished — revised to reflect today’s realities. Immunity should be conditional, not automatic, and contingent on transparency, accountability and compliance with rigorous standards overseen by the FCC or FTC. Section 230 has its opponents, but frankly, all say the same thing: the First Amendment may be in jeopardy. Let’s let those who want to challenge speech go to court.
But reform of Section 230 isn’t the only alternative. Also, Congress should consider:
Privacy and data-protection laws to limit how companies collect, sell and weaponize personal data. Algorithmic transparency requirements so the public can see how content is prioritized and promoted. Antitrust enforcement to reduce monopoly power and foster competition among smaller, ethical platforms. Child-protection standards that restrict addictive design features and targeting of minors. Disclosure rules for political advertising to safeguard elections from manipulation and deepfakes.Technology has transformed health care, education and commerce. But it has also unleashed division, disinformation and distrust at a scale unseen since World War II. Unless Congress restores guardrails for truth, the very foundation of civic life will continue to erode.
Congress must act.
Section 230 should be amended — not scrapped wholesale, but modernized to reflect today’s realities. Social media companies should no longer be categorically exempt from civil liability. If exemptions are to remain, they must be conditional, granted only after rigorous hearings and review, with oversight from agencies like the FCC.
In parallel, we must invest in the institutions that keep democracy alive. That means strengthening the financial and educational foundations of journalism, reinventing the university curriculum to prepare future reporters for the digital age, and creating incentives for media companies — new and old — to uphold high standards of ethics and evidence.
Technology has transformed health care, education, business and government for the better. But it has also unleashed some of the most divisive, discriminatory and hate-filled rhetoric we have seen since World War II. The United States cannot continue to rely on a Wild West system where profit-driven platforms dictate the flow of public information.
John M. Eger is professor emeritus in the School of Journalism and Media Studies at San Diego State University. He previously served as telecommunications advisor to President Gerald R. Ford, legal assistant to FCC Chairman Dean Burch, and Senior Vice President of CBS.
Hence then, the article about opinion congress must rein in social media s misinformation and hate was published today ( ) and is available on Times of San Diego ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Opinion: Congress must rein in social media’s misinformation and hate )
Also on site :
- Stunning ISS Photo of Florida, Cuba Captures & 039;Moonglint& 039;
- Saudi-led coalition strikes Yemeni port over unauthorised weapons shipment
- Will Cristiano Ronaldo play tonight for Al-Nassr vs Al Ettifaq in SPL 2025-26?