Recent revelations surrounding Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election and the role that "fake news" may have played in shaping voter preferences have sparked a broad conversation on how to combat the spread and influence of disinformation online. Emerging from this conversation has been a number of proposals that seek to pass legislation or promulgate regulations that would make it more difficult for disinformation to flow through the Web. To that end, these interventions will confront the long-standing legal protections provided by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA 230), a key legal provision which broadly shields platforms from legal liability for the actions of third-party users of their services. The present-day debates on how to address "fake news" will join the legacy of efforts to reform or eliminate the shield provided by CDA 230. This chapter seeks to address three questions given this historical background. First, would modifications to CDA 230 pave the way to an effective response to the challenges posed by disinformation online? Second, if so, should such modifications be made? Finally, how should such modifications be crafted?

Technology companies are the sheriffs of what used to be the wild west of the internet. In the 1990s, when the internet was young, the imagery of the western frontier really seemed like a good analogy. The internet seemed to radically decentralize power: no longer could massive publishers or broadcasters control the media; anyone could be a publisher and get their message out.1 The internet seemed inherently designed to preserve the freedom of individuals. It seemed impossible to enforce laws against the apparently anonymous masses of internet users distributed around the world. The commercial internet grew out of a military design that avoided single points of failure and was resilient against both nuclear attack and interference by hostile governments.2

In August 2017, several hundred white nationalists marched on the small university town of Charlottesville, Virginia. The rally turned tragic when one of the protesters rammed his car into a crowd of counterprotesters, killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer. The Washington Post characterized the protesters as “a meticulously organized, well-coordinated and heavily armed company of white nationalists.”1