Every entrepreneur dreams of creating the next big website or social media platform. You imagine the excitement, the traffic, the growth—but do you also think about the darker side? What happens when your platform becomes a breeding ground for harmful content or misinformation? Should you be held accountable, or is it enough to just provide the tools and let users take responsibility?

Welcome to your Dinner Table Debates Daily Deep Dive, where we explore real topics from our decks and give you everything you need to debate, in under 10 minutes. Today's topic is: “Websites and Social Media platforms should be held responsible for content that is posted on their sites.” This topic comes from our Full-Size Essentials Collection deck.

The rise of the internet has revolutionized communication and information sharing, with over 4.9 billion people using the web as of 2023. Social media platforms alone account for over 60% of internet activity, connecting people across the globe. But this connectivity also has a dark side—misinformation, hate speech, and harmful content. The debate over platform accountability gained traction with laws like the United States’ Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects platforms from being treated as publishers of third-party content. Critics argue this gives companies too much leeway, while supporters believe it safeguards free speech. In recent years, events like the Capitol riots of January 6, 2021, and the spread of COVID-19 misinformation have brought these issues to the forefront, leading to renewed scrutiny of platform policies.

This debate is crucial because it touches on the balance between innovation, safety, and freedom of expression. Social media and websites shape public discourse, influence elections, and even impact mental health. Determining who bears responsibility for content could reshape how these platforms operate and affect everyone who uses them.

Let’s examine both sides of the debate. Those who agree that websites and social media platforms should be held responsible for content argue that platforms profit from user-generated content and should take accountability. Social media giants like Facebook and YouTube earn billions by hosting content that draws users in. When harmful or false information spreads, it can lead to real-world harm—such as influencing damaging health decisions or violence. Accountability could encourage safer digital spaces by deterring harmful content, reducing cyberbullying, harassment, and hate speech. For instance, Germany’s Network Enforcement Act fines platforms up to €50 million for failing to remove illegal content within 24 hours, prompting quicker responses and safer environments. Additionally, platforms have demonstrated their ability to moderate content effectively, as seen during the 2020 U.S. election when platforms like Twitter flagged or removed false claims about voter fraud.

On the other hand, opponents argue that policing all content is an impossible task. With millions of posts per minute, even the most advanced algorithms struggle to catch every harmful post. Over-censorship could lead to the removal of legitimate content, stifling free expression. Some believe that real responsibility lies with the users, not the platforms. Just as landlords aren’t responsible for tenants’ behavior, platforms shouldn’t be held accountable for users’ actions. Moreover, increased regulation could stifle innovation, making it harder for smaller platforms and startups to compete. Parler, for instance, was removed from app stores after the January 6 riots due to its inability to remove harmful content, and it has struggled to recover since.

Rebuttals to these points include arguments like the fact that while platforms profit from user-generated content, the sheer scale of posts makes universal oversight impractical. On the flip side, holding users solely responsible ignores the platform's role in amplifying harmful content through algorithms designed to maximize engagement.

In recent years, calls for greater platform accountability have intensified. The European Union implemented the Digital Services Act in 2023, requiring platforms to assess and mitigate risks of harm caused by their services. Meanwhile, debates around Section 230 in the U.S. continue, with some advocating reform to impose stricter regulations.

Want to dig deeper into this topic? When playing Dinner Table Debates at home, you can redefine the debate in unique ways. For instance, Agree might argue that social media platforms should be held accountable only for flagged content or illegal content, not offensive content. Disagree might suggest regulating algorithms instead of platforms. These creative approaches create dynamic discussions every time.

If you enjoyed this deep dive, you can debate this topic and many more by getting your own Dinner Table Debates deck at DinnerTableDebates.com. Save 10% with code PODCAST10 and join the debate on Instagram and TikTok. Happy debating!