I would like to clear up a question about communications companies which was not addressed in the video “Break Up Ma Facebook: Will Conservatives Join Sen. Warren’s Crusade?” Companies which provide information to consumers are of two basic types, in the eyes of US law. The first is called a content provider. A content provider makes the information, or produces it, or selects which information from random or deliberate sources produce it. An example of this type of communication company is a newspaper, or a television station. The content is either of their production, or they have approved it. The second kind of communication company is called a common carrier. A common carrier simply transports the information around, or to its desired target. An example is the phone company, or a cable service.
The major difference between the two, legally, is that a common carrier is not responsible for the content of information it delivers, while a content provider is. For example, if one were to pass credit card information not their own over the telephone, the telephone company would not be liable for damages to the person whose credit card information was stolen, only the person who passed the information. However, if a newspaper, say, were to publish a ‘letter to the editor’ which contained someone’s credit card information, they would be responsible for damages to the person whose information was stolen, since they chose to publish it without redacting the personal information.
The problem with Facebook, and other social media, is that they wish to be legally immune from what they publish, and to decide which content they will allow. You can’t have it both ways. Either the social media companies are just providing a place for people to exchange information, or they are providing (and thus are responsible for) content. If they are a common carrier, that’s fine, but they have to stop censoring the content in any way. If, however, they choose to be content providers, every nasty post, by any user, which offends someone, could be litigated. In my opinion, if Facebook alone is found to be a content provider, the damages from Facebook posts would quickly exceed the national debt.
2 replies on “The Two Types of Communications Companies”
It’s actually not both ways, it’s just their way. They can have it their way, as long as they have the power to do so.
Not only do Facebook et al wish to be immune from what they publish, they ARE immune from what they publish. Congress gave them that immunity specifically in, I think, 1998, as a part of a package of legislation to ‘help’ push along the digital revolution. Thanks, Congress!