BAR REPORT - Students explore social media and tech legal issues in state bar's BHM essay contest
NJ students explore legal issues of social media and technology as part of annual MIPS Black History Month high school essay contest
March 01, 2021 at 08:03 AM
4 minute read
The New Jersey State Bar Association Minorities in the Profession Section's (MIPS) annual Black History Month high school essay contest yielded dozens of essays from students who wrote about the landmark law that shields social media companies from liability.
Students were asked to submit essays on why Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 was originally passed into law; what its impact has been; and whether the law should be changed and, if so, how it should be changed.
The judges winnowed the submissions down to five finalists, whose essays have been excerpted below. A single winning essay was not selected, but the finalists competed in a trivia contest for cash prizes at MIP's virtual Black History Month celebration, which was held last week.
The event also included a keynote address by Superior Court Judge Avion M. Benjamin; a performance by the Trenton High School Orchestra; and a virtual art show featuring the work of Black New Jersey artist Anthony Gartmond, a retired Essex County assistant prosecutor.
The following is a sampling from the finalists' essays.
Adam Bauhs Pingry School, Basking Ridge
"As social media has woven itself into the lives of practically every American, many blame tech companies for taking advantage of their freedom with negligent, reckless and irresponsible behavior. In a modern context, the amount of freedom we give tech companies feels absurd considering their monumental power: They take no responsibility for anything posted on their sites while at the same time wielding complete power to silence or amplify anybody they want. Section 230 was a landmark law that was a great idea in its time and helped establish the internet as we know it; however, it must be reexamined given the massive changes that have occurred since its inception."
Sharmaine Jimenez East Brunswick High School, East Brunswick
"Section 230 is the most defining piece of internet legislation, and a change would throw off balance between two unsavory opposites. Social media is a new form of communication, and like any innovation, there will be new challenges, but Section 230 is too critical to the existence of social media to amend. Instead, we should remember that these websites are private businesses and use our online voice to declare what behavior we will tolerate as consumers."
Isabelle Embden Kent Place School, Summit
"The law is struggling to keep up with the constant evolution of technology. There has been extensive growth in the tech industry since 1996, a time where the internet was not available in the palm of one's hand. The act states that platforms cannot be held liable as long as they use "good faith" in their decisions and efforts toward restricting content. The "good faith" requirement needs to be heightened to protect viewers from cyberstalking, harassment, fake news, violence and other issues."
Matthew Lee East Brunswick High School, East Brunswick
"The initial purpose of Section 230 was to protect online companies from liability regarding what their users posted, and to protect any moderation efforts. Consequently, Section 230 protects freedom of expression on the internet by allowing sites to host content regardless of how controversial it may be."
Sanjana Bandi Middlesex County Academy for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Technology, Edison
"The internet is an intricate web of worldwide communities, woven together by content created and shared by people of all backgrounds. Online communities can be unpredictable and difficult to control, but those are the qualities that allow them to flourish. People interact in different ways— this can often be chaotic and irritating, but it is also illuminating and informative, and that is simply how free speech exists. The internet can function this way due to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMidlevel Associates Angered by Lack of Tech Investment
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250