Analysis of why the PACT Act is a far better approach to reforming CDA 230 than the EARN IT Act, even with its shortcomings and need for improvement
Alex Feerst, one of the great thinkers about Internet content moderation, has a revealing metaphor about the real-world work involved. Tweets: @alexstamos , @mchrisriley , @daphnehk , and @ellanso Tweets: Alex Stamos / @alexstamos : A fantastic overview (as I expect from @daphnehk) of what looks like the most serious proposal on content moderation in DC these days. https://twitter.com/... Chris Riley / @mchrisriley : This is the right take. I typically refer to PACT Act as, by far, the best starting point for Section 230 reform discussions, and am constantly pointing folk in my network to consider how we can make it better going forward. But as Daphne makes clear, there's still a ways to go. https://twitter.com/... Daphne Keller / @daphnehk : Why the PACT Act is worlds better than EARN IT, even if it still has far to go. My take: https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/ ... Emma Llanso / @ellanso : The most thorough explanation of the strengths and (many) weaknesses of the PACT Act that I've seen so far: https://twitter.com/...
Context & Ripple Effects
This Stanford CIS analysis by Daphne Keller landed at the center of a live expert conversation: Alex Stamos called her overview of the PACT Act the most serious content-moderation proposal in DC, Emma Llanso called it the most thorough account of its strengths and weaknesses, and Chris Riley pushed his network to treat the bill as the best starting point rather than a finished product. That matters because the rival on the table, the EARN IT Act, is modeled after FOSTA — an earlier carve-out from Section 230 that critics blame for collateral damage to speech and safety.
The piece also arrives amid broader pressure on CDA 230 from unexpected directions: coverage of Marriott, Disney, and IBM lobbying to limit Section 230 shows the anti-230 coalition extends well past social-media rivals, raising the stakes of which reform template wins.
First-order effects
- The expert consensus documented here (Stamos, Riley, Llanso) gives the PACT Act a legitimacy boost as the reference framework for Section 230 discussions, pulling advocacy energy away from the EARN IT Act.
Second-order effects
- EARN IT backers now have to answer a substantive counterproposal rather than face only abolitionist objections — while CIS's own later analyses of how the FOSTA-modeled bill would worsen the online CSAM problem harden the case against it.
Third-order effects
- Even the preferred template has problems: Techdirt's review of the newer PACT version found it convoluted and loaded with ideas that spawn new problems, suggesting Section 230 reform is converging on procedural redesign of moderation duties rather than simple liability removal — with the First Amendment exposure flagged in later coverage as the persistent constraint on any of these bills.
The trend: The Section 230 debate is shifting from whether to amend the law to which procedural blueprint — PACT-style notice-and-improvement mechanics versus EARN IT-style conditional immunity — will define platform content-moderation obligations.