AI review Review 1 of 1
Reviewed: 1 finding, all fixed
Tone 1
Show changes Hide changes
Tone
Before “Prodigy's claimed editorial control makes it a publisher; Congress answers with Section 230.”
After “Court treats Prodigy as a publisher; Congress cites the ruling when enacting Section 230.”
Why: The summary line uses "answers with", which presents Section 230 as a rebuttal or rejoinder to the court. That is a narrative framing, not a documented fact. The sources support a narrower claim: the conference report says one purpose of Section 230 was to overrule this decision. The summary is also longer than the 10-15 word guideline for timeline summaries.