 And I'm now going to recognize Senator Schatz, who will be joining us remotely for his opening statement. Senator Schatz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing today to discuss Section 230 of the Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency Act, the PACT Act. Before I go any further, I just want to offer some thanks to the chairman of the subcommittee, Chairman Thune. Our process has been serious. It has been bipartisan. It is the way the Senate should work. It is the way the Commerce Committee should work. And I'm proud to partner with him on this legislation. Unfortunately, a lot of the discussion around Section 230 has been focused on provocative, but sometimes reactionary, and in some cases unconstitutional ideas based on the perceived political slights of the day. And there may be some who try to use this hearing as an opportunity to create a clip for social media or to make a few partisan headlines, but that's not what this hearing is for. We are here to legislate. The work we are doing here today is a serious effort to review Section 230 objectively and on a bipartisan basis. To evaluate how this law should be amended to benefit the American people. This work is already difficult and it has made much more difficult by grandstanding. Section 230 was, by all accounts, a prescient and novel idea back in 1996 when it became law. It prevented online platforms from being treated as the publisher or speaker of third-party content and that avoided liability for their users' content. And in so doing, this allowed innovators in the United States to create and build products using third-party content without the threat of litigation. This unique idea is one reason why the largest tech companies began in the United States. And because they started here, many of these platforms became a vehicle for the spread of free speech and democratic ideals across the planet. But today's internet is different from when Section 230 is adopted and this brings me to a fundamental point. It is okay to update a law. It doesn't mean you think the law was badly written or is deeply, deeply flawed. It just means that as the Telecommunications Act is periodically amended as the National Defense Authorization Act is periodically amended, that this law needs to be updated so that it continues to work well. Now that the internet has involved, it is important to ask how Section 230 should evolve along with it. And last month, I introduced the PACT Act with Senator Thune. The bill amends Section 230 and imposes new responsibilities, but not unreasonable ones on online platforms. It focuses on three concepts, accountability, transparency, and protections for consumers online. To make platforms more accountable to their consumers, the bill requires platforms to respond to consumer complaints about content that is against their own acceptable use policies or that a court has already determined to be illegal. To improve transparency by requiring platforms to publish reports so that people know what a platform is doing to moderate based on its own rules. And it increases online consumer protections by fixing the current legal disparities between online and offline commerce and communications. Some view the debate about Section 230 reform as an opportunity to work the refs or claim bias or make people fearful of the enforcement of content moderation policies. Our approach has been different. This bill is not targeted at a specific type of content, business model or company, and its purpose is not to censor or control or even influence free speech. Diverse viewpoints make us stronger as a nation. It's better for the internet. And I believe that we should preserve robust protections that enable discourse in our country online and offline. But I'm proud to be working on such a measured approach to Section 230 reform. And I appreciate the partnership with Senator Thune and his excellent staff. This has been truly a bipartisan effort. And I thank him for the hard work. Section 230 proponents say that Congress can't possibly change this law without disrupting all of the great innovation that it has enabled. And I just disagree with that. The legislative process is about making sure that our laws are in the public interest and the PACT Act offers some common sense changes to the way that the statute functions. So consumers have protections. So platforms have accountability and transparency. And so that the statute works today for the internet. I want to thank the witnesses for joining us and sharing their expertise on this issue. As part of its jurisdictional oversight on these issues, the subcommittee looks forward to hearing from you about how the PACT Act's provisions might be a realistic step towards modernizing Section 230. And I look forward to hearing their testimony.