"“I feel like the evolution of GIFCT is a real illustration of just how slippery terms like platform responsibility or platform accountability turn out to be in practice,” Keller said. When politicians demand initiatives like the GIFCT, she continued, it appears as though democratic governments are forcing platforms to act justly and lawfully. “But that’s not what it’s turned out to mean at all in practice,” said Keller. “In practice, it meant that four platforms got together and made this totally opaque, really powerful system that’s applying rules that aren’t the law … to control online speech.”"
The Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School is a leader in the study of the law and policy around the Internet and other emerging technologies.