And because I've now seen how recklessly he approaches topics behind the scenes, it's now impossible for me to take anything he reports on seriously. If he's willing to toss out his integrity for one subject, whose to say he's not doing it for others. 🤷🏻‍♀️

(and has been told repeatedly by lawyers, law professors, scholars, and industry professionals that he is getting the facts wrong).

It's a completely fair point.

However, there's a lot going on behind the scenes I can't share publicly that indicate that this reporter is absolutely committed to misrepresenting the facts.

Much of the reporting isn't even a matter of opinion. He literally gets the law wrong.

I think we need a massive tariff on podcast equipment.

It's giving "don't forget to like comment and subscribe guys!!!!!!"

So weird and unserious.

Brian, you're welcome to believe whatever you care to believe, but please be honest with your listeners. Relinquish your title as a journalist and stop playing in our faces.

You are no better than Fox News at this point.

Brian's "reporting" (more like, his agenda) will, in turn, benefit the wealthy, the tech billionaires, and MAGA.

Brian's careless, might I even say reckless, approach to this topic will do immense damage to communities at the margins: women, people of color, LGBTQ+ identifying people, those suffering from mental and physical health issues. You name it.

This discourse has serious repercussions. Our current administration is doing everything in its power to keep us dumb, sick, and uninformed.

That's because communication and knowledge unites us. Section 230 is a key part of our ability to communicate with each other.

From what I've heard, those conversations seem to have gone south fast. As if they were talking to a brick wall. Or rather, a person who so very clearly made up their mind.

That's not how journalists are supposed to operate. That's how activists behave, which is fine, but notably not journalists.

From what I've seen behind the scenes, Brian refused to engage honestly with the few experts he has spoken with on this topic.

Several of my friends have tried to explain to him privately his profound ignorance of the law and the communities he is directly damaging.

Talk about the many women, like me, who have gone through sexual abuse and have relied entirely on access to social media to communicate our stories and warn others about powerful and abusive men in our spaces.

That speech isn't possible without 230.

For the same reason, there is a huge reason why many of us experts on the pro Section 230 front care about an honest reporting of the law.

If Brian wants to talk about deepfakes, he should also talk about the #metoo movement and how 230, in many ways, underpins its existence.

As Mike said in his post, there are serious issues worth a fully informed discussion. NCEI, synthetic or otherwise, is deeply concerning and incredibly harmful.

It's also a challenging issue. That's why there are experts who have dedicated their lives to studying just that problem.

To be clear, this has nothing to do with his opinion about 230. He is free to dislike 230 and free to his opinion, no matter how misguided.

But when he puts himself out there as a journalist dedicated to the truth, we expect better.

I will anti SLAPP you don't even think about it

(to be thoroughly and crystal clear, Mike has nothing to do with Epstein. This is a document that contains an Internet law syllabus that contains an article written by Mike)