A Call To Action (Regarding Section 230 & S.3546)

Hello, ladies, gentlemen and folks. AreKayHen here.

To get into the habit of blogging more often than not, I decided ever since the beginning of this year, in the middle of the month, to give you reminders about how some Toon Comm services are available at certain times. Like now, for example, while commissions are available right now until further notice.

Why am I saying this to you? Well, I might not be able to do that anymore, along with the other things I do on the internet. 

What I am taking about here is S.3546, the act with a sole purpose to repeal Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934, introduced by Senator Lindsey Graham back in December 17, 2025 and recently promoted by Joseph Gordon-Levitt of all people.

Now, admittedly, I'm not too well-educated on the subject of U.S. civics and Section 230. However, after looking up a few things about this situation in particular, specifically in

• https://www.techdirt.com/2026/02/12/joseph-gordon-levitt-goes-to-washington-dc-gets-section-230-completely-backwards/, 
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0RRxR4LvK4&t=2501s,
• https://www.fightforthefuture.org/actions/joseph-gordon-levitt-letter/,
• https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/3546/text, 

I believe I have a pretty good gist of what will happen to the internet if this act becomes U.S. law.

(...and yes, just a heads up, this will get unnecessarily political.) 

While Section 230 TECHNICALLY isn't a First Amendment thing, it's seen as something that fits well, if not better, with the First Amendment. Basically, it allows platforms like Bluesky, Instagram and Discord, regardless of what they are or what they promote, to be held legally liable just for the platform's position and not for the user-generated content that is placed in the platform, like, for example, my art on Newgrounds or my tweets on Twitter/X. 

Essentially, this IS what the internet was made for: to post whatever you want, whether or not you get backlash or harsh consequences for it afterwards and to see the content that other people made, creating new ideas, perspectives and experiences.

To repeal Section 230 would not just change the internet as we know it, but also probably end it. Even WHEN platforms take the time to censor any free speech that will not make them legally liable for, that will not stop the inevitable suing of said platforms until they are shut down or bought by billionaires for their own personal gain and THEN become shut down because not even THEIR greed and wealth is infinite.

At this point, you're probably wondering why some U.S. politicians think repealing this sacred section is a great idea that will totally not end in disaster. Weeeeeell, it involves a number of factors, namely the dismantling attacks of Section 230 by billionaires, Christian fundamentalists and Pro-Israel groups since the last decade (at least according to Taylor Lorenz from the YouTube video) and the myth that Section 230 was protecting platforms for being "neutral," as proclaimed by Joseph Gordon-Levitt and probably also the other people who support dismantling it, such as Ted Cruz and Amy Schumer.

This myth was and is very sinister. After all, for one thing, Joseph Gordon-Levitt thought and spoke out loud in Washington D.C. earlier this month that, because Section 230 was (again, SUPPOSEDLY) protecting platforms for being "neutral," that means Big Tech is not being held accountable for their actions. As you can see, disinformation of any kind can be "innocently" used as a solution for something almost anybody can agree on, which is a fatal mistake.

Although Joseph Gordon-Levitt tried his best to explain after the fact in a YouTube video that he wants to reform instead of repeal Section 230, the problem here is that

• it is a blatant lie. He explicitly said that day that he expects 100 Yays and 0 Nays in the Senate for the repeal, not the reform.
• he made this conclusion from articles created by people who are NOT, in fact, legal experts (notably, Audrey Tang, a former Digital Minister from Taiwan).
• he supports NCOSE (the National Center of Sexual Exploitation), the far-right organization among many right-wing organizations, including the Heritage Foundation, who want to repeal Section 230.
• (allegedly) when far-right types or bad actors SAY they want to reform Section 230, they most likely mean they want to remove it entirely.

Soooooo, yeah, basically, free speech on the internet, at LEAST in the U.S., is under attack and action on this needs to be made as soon as possible. Fortunately, we have time on our side.

Currently, as I am writing this blog post, according to Congress.gov, this act has only been introduced and has not yet passed in the Senate.

Now is the time to spread the word, either by calling your representatives or spreading the word about this terrible decision, to save the internet as we know it.

That is all I have to say on this matter. I wish you all good luck in regards to future internet use.