Ehhh, white supremacists were some of the earliest adopters of the internet. The problems with Parler, Gab, etc. aren't new. I don't think removing Section 230 will help anyone.

This person is arguing we should get rid of automated moderation is stone-cold stupid. There's more evils to be moderated than just nazis. Why should we subject humans to child pornography when we have automated tools that can identify a broad class of child pornography? And what's to stop the "good-faith human moderators" from being bad? Employing automated moderation is a necessary step of good-faith measures.

This person acknowledges that ISPs, etc. should still be seen as service providers, but the reality is that Twitter, etc. are practically utilities for common people nowadays. The common citizen doesn't have the ability to call a press conference or send mass mailings on a whim (like Trump does).

I think the root of this evil lies in the engagement and marketing algorithms that big sites use. It's like the Paperclip game about an AI that optimizes paperclip production (at the cost of everything else) https://www.decisionproblem.com/paperclips/index2.html

I almost feel like I'm missing some big parts of the argument here

I think reactionary internet culture is a symptom of a larger cultural illness and trying to point to a specific law or regulation as a fix for internet psychos is doomed to fail

Also what's to stop these companies from moving their operations to some other far right ruled nation? Moreover, who in the american government is going to be the one that tries to regulate social media? How much of the Democratic party's money comes from big tech donations?