This would amount to government control of social media. As I note above, private companies are not required to platform anything they don’t want to.

Section 230 protects online platforms from being held legally liable for content that users post on their sites. This means that companies like Facebook, Twitter, or YouTube aren’t treated as the publishers of user-generated content, and thus aren’t responsible for defamatory, illegal, or harmful posts made by third parties.

Here’s where the author contradicts themselves:

Section 230 also allows these platforms to moderate or remove content they find objectionable, offensive, or harmful, without being held liable for doing so. The law encourages “good faith” moderation efforts, allowing companies to remove harmful content while remaining shielded from lawsuits that might otherwise arise from such decisions.

Is the author proposing that the government be the arbiter of what is “objectionable, offensive, or harmful”?

Full contextual analysis of Section 5: Independent Regulatory Agencies here.