As i understood it at the time, 230 was put in place to ensure internet provides were treated as common carriers not publishers.
Common carriers do NOT look at what they are carrying (apart from legal constraints, and they better have a lot more than a mere suspicion of illegality). Common carriers carry & then deliver untouched, uninspected and unseen, that which they have undertaken to carry.
Publishers on the other hand, choose, inspect, edit and/or comment on what they carry.
Are Facebook et al acting as common carriers or as publishers?
Do they refuse, remove, delete or otherwise arbitrarily modify what they are given to ‘carry’ ? As far as I can see yes they do.
Therefore they are no longer common carriers and no longer deserve the protection that common carriers have to have in order to function. Therefore section 230 is no longer applicable and they should be treated like any other publisher & be liable for the content of what they choose to publish. Let them, like magazines & newspapers before them, publish and be damned!
Or revert to being common carriers.
Ask the post office to inspect letters for ‘hate crimes’ never mind any other illegal actions? How do you feel about having your letters opened & inspected because they might contain illegal content? There is quite a high bar on getting postal inspection warrants like there is (supposed to be) for getting wire taps etc.
Facebook et al gave up common carrier status when they first removed a post that was not illegal which they had not been legally instructed to remove.