INTERNACIONAL
Bipartisan lawmakers want to strip Big Tech’s legal immunity that can shield social media companies
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
It was the mid-1990s. And the world was online.
No doomscrolling for hours through Instagram and X.
But people were plowing through GeoCities. There were Hotbot searches – before the days of Google and AI. There was even Ask Jeeves, long before Grok.
The U.S. Capitol building is shown in Washington, D.C. A Romanian man admitted to participating in a series of «swatting» calls that targeted members of Congress, as well as other government officials. (Heather Diehl/Getty Images)
Congress was on the precipice of adopting a landmark telecommunications law which would dictate the digital landscape for decades.
When signing the Telecommunications Act of 1996 into law, former President Clinton declared how the measure would plow «a superhighway to serve both the private sector and the public interest.»
RAND PAUL SAYS PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH YOUTUBE AND GOOGLE CHANGED HIS MIND ABOUT PLATFORM LIABILITY
Yup. Back then, some still referred to the internet as «The Information Superhighway.»
The 1990s were heady. Full of optimism and possibility. The. U.S. won the Cold War. The economy boomed and was «new.» The internet linked the world.
But there was a serious debate about free speech. Who should regulate what was online? Should the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) address what was proper to post, the same way it oversaw the TV and radio airwaves?
In the early ‘90s, the National Security Agency (NSA) used a cryptographic backdoor to intercept phone calls called the «clipper chip.» That raised questions about government surveillance. Would that carry over to what the government «watched» when people posted content online?
A U.S. National Security Agency logo is displayed on a smartphone screen with stock market percentages in the background in this photo illustration on Jan. 30, 2024, in Poland. (Omar Marques/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images)
Congress ultimately decided to give the internet a lot of leeway – in the interest of free speech. Telecommunications firms persuaded lawmakers to grant them a legal shelter. «Carriers» weren’t responsible if «customers» posted questionable or offensive material.
«We said that the FCC would not regulate either the content or the character of the internet,» said then- Rep. Chris Cox (R-Calif.) during a 1995 floor debate. «We can’t have the government in the interest of uniformity coming up with standards to regulate this industry.»
Cox was a key player behind shaping policy in that 1996 telecommunications law. So was then-Rep. and now Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
«The internet is the shining star of the information age,» proclaimed Wyden in 1996.
RULING AGAINST META AND GOOGLE COULD SET THE STAGE FOR CHANGES IN HANDLING HATE CONTENT
But the Oregon Democrat fretted about some of the filth which was already permeating the internet in its earliest renditions.
«My wife and I have seen our kids find their way into these chat rooms which make their middle age parents cringe,» said Wyden.
But like Cox, Wyden feared that «censorship could really spoil much of its promise.»
So they fought to keep some government regulation out of the telecommunications law. And they inoculated internet providers with something called «Section 230» of that law. Section 230 shielded telecom firms with immunity from lawsuits and criminal charges based on what customers posted on their forums.
Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) described the logic behind Section 230 and the role of service providers:
«If you, as a public service, put up a billboard in a hall and someone puts something on the billboard that says, ‘Congressman Obernolte beats his wife,’ the owner of the billboard is not responsible for the content of that message,» said the California Republican.
Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., attends a House Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands hearing on the 9/11 Memorial and Museum Act and other legislation in the Longworth Building on Dec. 7, 2021. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images)
But lots of people and entities post all sorts of things on today’s worldwide «billboard.» That’s why some lawmakers want to fundamentally alter social media as we know it by paring back Section 230.
«Section 230 is absolute liability protection, immunity for the largest social media companies in the world. It’s driving people to suicide. It is ruining our society,» said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of the most ardent advocates for changing the law. «If you buy a bad car, you can sue. Every product you buy, the company has to stand behind it. This is the only area of the law I know where the largest companies in the world have absolute legal immunity.»
Graham went as far to suggest that what is available online – and how people use social media – is «as dangerous as drinking.»
WHY META AND GOOGLE ARE LOSING COURT BATTLES FOR DAMAGING KIDS BY TRYING TO GET THEM ADDICTED
«It’s putting profits over people,» chimed in Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). «(Social media) should not have this absolute shield when it is destroying the lives of young people by driving toxic content at them through its algorithms.»
Bipartisan lawmakers are boiling about what social media firms allow users to post without legal consequences – even though Congress is partially responsible for creating this problem three decades ago.
«As long as these companies believe they’re immune from liability, they’re going to tell all of us to go to hell,» said Graham.
UNDER OATH, META’S ZUCKERBERG SHOWED WHY BIG TECH CAN’T POLICE ITSELF
Some lawmakers want to strip legal immunity from Big Tech for what winds up on their platforms.
«What we ought to do is start by allowing victims of child porn and other child abuse material and sexual abuse material to sue these companies,» said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Lawmakers believed that enhanced opportunities for voices and speech would enable the internet to flourish. They argued that the free market would create a rich environment online. So they sidelined their instincts to overregulate.
«Government is going to get out of the way and let parents and individuals control it rather than government doing that job for us,» said Cox in 1995.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., talks with reporters in the U.S. Capitol during votes on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
But lofty hopes for a lush «marketplace of ideas» online are dashed by some of the digital slop – and addictive nature of «phones» today.
«You talk to people and they’re scared to death of social media. They’re scared to death of AI,» said
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.).
That’s why lawmakers demand changes to Section 230.
One lawmaker says free speech safeguards are crucial for the people deciding what users see online. But not the technology behind it. Today, the technology makes many of those decisions about what we see and hear on our phones.
«If you just have an algorithm spewing all this information..» sighed Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). «The First Amendment doesn’t protect an algorithm.»
In 1996, Ron Wyden told C-SPAN during an interview that «censorship could really spoil much of (the internet’s) promise.»
And in 2026, Wyden is still leery of infringing on free speech through regulation. He says the hands-off approach helped the development of Wikipedia and the social media platform Bluesky. A more aggressive posture could stifle development.
«To get rid of (Section) 230, you’re going to have to roll over me,» said Wyden this year.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
In 2026, people are struggling to harness the technology. Trying to ween themselves off addiction to phones. Figuring out ways to keep kids from phones in order to build reading and vocabulary skills.
The digital optimism of the mid-1990s is gone. And those who were there are nostalgic for the sound of an old, staticky modem and the delightful proclamation that «you’ve got mail.»
first amendment, big tech backlash, technology, fcc, regulation, politics
INTERNACIONAL
Rebelión en el laborismo británico: tras la paliza electoral, diputados y sindicalistas piden la renuncia de Keir Starmer
INTERNACIONAL
Newsom’s ‘Golden State Start’ promises 400 free diapers per baby as California grapples with budget woes
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Gov. Gavin Newsom is rolling out a taxpayer-backed freebie for new parents, promising hundreds of diapers for every baby born in California under a new statewide program.
The Democrat announced Friday that the state will partner with nonprofit Baby2Baby to hand out 400 free diapers to families leaving participating hospitals, starting this summer. The initiative, dubbed «Golden State Start,» is being billed as a first-in-the-nation effort to ease the high cost of raising a child.
«Every baby born in California deserves a healthy start in life,» Newsom said in a statement, touting the plan as part of his broader push to tackle affordability.
CALIFORNIA IS BROKE, BUT IT’S NOT TOO LATE FOR THE REST OF US
Calif. Governor Gavin Newsom announced on May 8 that the state is partnering with Baby2Baby, a leading national nonprofit organization headquartered in California, to launch a first-in-the-nation program to provide free diapers to all new babies born in California. (Governor Gavin Newsom)
Under the program, hospitals will distribute the diapers directly to parents upon discharge. Officials said early rollout will prioritize facilities serving low-income patients on Medi-Cal, with plans to expand statewide.
During the program’s first year, it will be offered at about 65 to 75 hospitals that handle about a quarter of births in the state and largely serve low-income patients, Newsom’s office said, according to the Associated Press.
The move is the latest in a string of family-focused spending initiatives from the Newsom administration, which already includes free school meals and universal preschool for 4-year-olds.
Critics are likely to challenge the program’s price tag, particularly as California navigates a tightening fiscal environment. Fox News Digital has reached out to the governor’s office regarding the costs of the program.
According to the Associated Press, the state has allocated $7.4 million in last year’s budget to launch the free diaper initiative, and Governor Newsom’s latest proposal seeks an additional $12.5 million for implementation through the fiscal year ending in June 2027.
However, these spending goals collide with a sobering economic reality.
In its January budget overview, the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) noted that while the administration officially projected a $2.9 billion deficit for 2026-27, the long-term outlook is far more dire. The LAO warned that the state faces structural deficits ranging from $20 billion to $35 billion annually over the coming years
The state has partnered with nonprofit Baby2Baby to manufacture the diapers under the label «Golden State Start.» (Governor Gavin Newsom)
State officials said that they are also looking at ways to take on major diaper brands and drive down prices.
Baby2Baby, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit that distributes supplies to children in need, will handle manufacturing and logistics for the program. The group says diaper need is widespread, with as many as one in two families struggling to afford them.
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMS PARENTS PERIOD PRODUCTS ARE IN BATHROOMS FOR ‘ANY STUDENT WHO MENSTRUATES’
Co-CEOs Norah Weinstein and Kelly Sawyer Patricof praised the partnership as «historic,» saying it will help families during one of their most financially vulnerable moments.
«We are incredibly grateful to Governor Newsom for his ongoing commitment to combating diaper needs in California and could not be prouder to partner on this historic initiative that will support moms and babies at their most vulnerable time,» Weinstein and Patricof said in a joint statement.
During the program’s first year, it will be offered at about 65 to 75 hospitals that handle about a quarter of births in the state and largely serve low-income patients, Newsom’s office said. (Governor Gavin Newsom)
The announcement comes two years after Tennessee and Delaware became the first U.S. states to offer free diapers to families enrolled in their Medicaid programs, which provide healthcare to low-income families.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Tennessee families can go to pharmacies to pick up 100 diapers per month for children under two. The Delaware program, which began as a pilot before the state extended it in 2024, provides individuals with up to 80 diapers and up to one pack of baby wipes per week in the first 12 weeks.
Fox News Digital’s Michael Dorgan contributed to this report.
gavin newsom, baby deals, childrens health, parents, california
INTERNACIONAL
Nahuel Gallo contó por primera vez detalles sobre los 448 días de cautiverio: “Pensé en quitarme la vida”
El 8 de diciembre de 2024, Nahuel Gallo tenía previsto cruzar la frontera entre Colombia y Venezuela. Todo parecía en orden, hasta que un agente de la Dirección General de Contrainteligencia Militar (DGCIM) descubrió que era gendarme. “Ahí ya me trataban diferente. Me esposaron los pies, me esposaron las manos», contó en una entrevista exclusiva de TN Internacional que será transmitida este sábado a las 14:00.
Cuatro días después, su nombre empezó a circular en los medios argentinos con la noticia de que había sido detenido por el chavismo. Lo que ocurrió en ese cruce fronterizo, en sus propias palabras, fue una trampa que arrancó con una búsqueda en su celular.
Después de ese tenso intercambio con los agentes de la DGCIM, el gendarme argentino permaneció 448 días en cautiverio en Venezuela, sin la posibilidad de comunicarse con su familia. Ahora, Gallo cuenta su historia por primera vez.
El viaje y la frontera
Según contó en diálogo con la periodista Carolina Amoroso, Gallo salió de la Argentina el 6 de diciembre. Voló de Chile a Bogotá, luego a Cúcuta y desde allí cruzó, vía terrestre, hacia Venezuela. Cuando llegó a Migraciones, alrededor de las 8 de la mañana del 8 de diciembre, le dijeron que antes de sellarle el pasaporte debía pasar por una entrevista.
“Cuando vino el agente a entrevistarme, yo no sabía quién era. No sabía si era el SEBIN (Servicio Bolivariano de Inteligencia), la Policía, no entendía la diferencia entre una fuerza y la otra. Estaban de civil. Tenían arma, pero no tenían placa identificatoria”, relató.
El gendarme argentino habló en exclusiva con TN Internacional. (Foto: captura de TN.)
Él mostró toda la documentación reglamentaria para ingresar. “Tenía dólares en efectivo, pero no le dio mucha importancia. Lo que le importaba era ver mi celular”, agregó.
Gallo no tenía fotos uniformado. “No soy de sacar muchas fotos, ni posando con las armas, nada. Tenía fotos del bebé, de las carreras, paisajes”, aseguró.
Pero el agente no se detuvo en las fotos. “Entró a WhatsApp. Le pregunté qué hacía y me dijo que quería ver si hablaba mal de su presidente. Puso ‘Chávez’, no salió nada. Puso ‘Maduro’ y ese fue el detonante”.
En ese chat con su esposa, María Alexandra Gómez, había una conversación donde hablaban de la realidad del país. En ese momento, el intercambio con el agente se tensó aun más. “Me dijo que yo hablaba mal de su presidente, que quién era yo para decir eso. Le dije que era una conversación vieja, que no tenía nada que ver, que era una conversación privada con mi mujer”. Cuando Gallo salió un momento, los policías que estaban afuera también lo minimizaron: “Me dijeron ‘todo el mundo habla mal de Maduro’. Pero el agente no lo tomó igual”.
En esa primera instancia, Gallo no reveló que era integrante de la Gendarmería Nacional. “Dije que era aduanero, que trabajaba en la Aduana en el área de Seguridad. Nunca dije que era gendarme”.
Leé también: Nahuel Gallo denunció en la Justicia las torturas que sufrió en Venezuela: “Me duele volver a esos momentos”
El integrante de las fuerzas venezolanas revisó con más profundidad el celular y encontraron una foto que lo delataba. “Ahí ya me trataban diferente. Me esposaron los pies, me esposaron las manos. Y también se enojaron porque les había mentido, porque no era aduanero sino personal de una fuerza”. Su delito, aparentemente, fue enviar un mensaje en el que mencionó a Maduro. “Acá en Venezuela nadie habla mal del presidente porque si no la pasa mal”, le dijeron.
Antes de ese momento, ya lo habían golpeado. “Estaban enojados por lo de Maduro. Entonces me taparon la cabeza por primera vez. Yo decía, ¿por qué me tapan la cabeza?”.
“Lo había pensado”
Los 448 días de cautiverio tuvieron momentos oscuros, pero el más terrible fue el instante en el que lo detuvieron. “Para mí lo peor es diciembre. No saber qué iba a pasar conmigo, no saber de María, de mi bebé. Los golpes que te pegan por ser gendarme o por ser argentino. Estar 24 horas los siete días en la celda… uno piensa muchas cosas”, aseguró.
Y luego, confesó: “Siempre me preguntan si quise quitarme la vida. Y la respuesta es que lo había pensado”.
Nahuel Gallo, Venezuela, Argentina, Nicolás Maduro
Patricia Bullrich encabezó una recorrida de La Libertad Avanza por Lugano y ya se mueve como candidata
El impensado apoyo de Berni a Milei por sostener a Adorni en medio de la investigación judicial: «Me saco el sombrero»
Deuda pública en Centroamérica: fuerte exposición a mercados internacionales y contrastes en el manejo local
Hizo su debut profesional con 16 años y tardó 15 segundos en marcar su primer gol: “El chico de la película”
Ensayos de rebelión en la granja libertaria
El caso Adorni desanima a la tropa digital de Milei y profundiza el desconcierto en el sector de Santiago Caputo
“Terminaste imponiendo un corralito”: Milei y Caputo cruzaron a Cavallo por pedir la eliminación del cepo cambiario
Patricia Bullrich le pidió a Manuel Adorni que presente su declaración jurada: «No puede quedar la sensación de que somos iguales a los que venimos a correr»
Marcela Pagano cruzó a Milei por acusarla de “mentirosa compulsiva”: “Confundió rating con grandeza”
Javier Milei adelantó que Manuel Adorni presentará su declaración jurada, tras la presión de Bullrich
POLITICA2 días agoPatricia Bullrich le pidió a Manuel Adorni que presente su declaración jurada: «No puede quedar la sensación de que somos iguales a los que venimos a correr»
- POLITICA2 días ago
Marcela Pagano cruzó a Milei por acusarla de “mentirosa compulsiva”: “Confundió rating con grandeza”
- POLITICA2 días ago
Javier Milei adelantó que Manuel Adorni presentará su declaración jurada, tras la presión de Bullrich
