The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies released Tuesday the second installment in its three-part research series analyzing Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
The new brief, “The Implications of Section 230 for Black Communities: Opportunities and Challenges for Black Communities Due to Content Moderation,” examines how judicial interpretations of Section 230 grant online platforms broad immunity for content moderation decisions.
These protections create a complex dynamic that both protects and potentially harms Black communities online, researchers found.
While content moderation helps remove hate speech, misinformation and online abuse, the study reveals moderation practices can be inconsistently applied, disproportionately affecting Black users, creators and activists. The research also highlights how platform immunity shields companies from liability even when their decisions result in over-removal, discrimination or suppression of legitimate speech.
“The same legal shield that allows platforms to remove dangerous content without fear of legal backlash also enables them to disproportionately suppress content by and about Black people,” said Danielle Davis, the briefs’ author and Joint Center Technology Policy Director.
Davis noted that as platforms expand their moderation tools, “Black users are increasingly caught in the crosshairs—facing takedowns, shadow bans, or deprioritized content that may not impact other users in the same way.”
The research builds on work co-authored by Spencer Overton, Patricia Roberts Harris Research Professor of Law at George Washington University, and Catherine Powell, Eunice Hunton Carter Distinguished Research Scholar and Professor of Law. Their article, “The Implications of Section 230 for Black Communities,” serves as the foundation for the series.
The Joint Center will release a final brief exploring proposed Section 230 reforms and their potential impact on Black communities.