•  
  •  
 
Indiana Law Journal

Document Type

Note

Publication Date

Fall 2025

Publication Citation

101 Indiana Law Journal 257

Abstract

Traditionally, the information market is centrally controlled. Once information consumption transitioned from the physical world to the digital world, the barrier of entry to the information dissemination market was reduced from printing presses and distribution networks to a smartphone and an internet connection. Ostensibly anyone can distribute any idea at any time. This strains the traditional information governance model that has dominated the information market for centuries; where epistemic authorities once controlled both the streams of information and the kinds of information that entered them, now social media companies exert limited control over information streams and no control over what information enters those streams. Yet, social media companies are the only gatekeepers of what information stays in the streams and what information is amplified. The decisions that social media companies make with regard to information moderation on their platforms are entirely informed by their profit-seeking motive; little, if any, weight is given to social considerations because current law insulates social media companies from legal liability for the content hosted on their platforms. Thus, this governance model fails to effectively moderate information at a socially optimal level. Consequently, the People become disconnected, mental health suffers, and trust in democratic institutions erode. Drawing on Elinor Ostrom’s common-pool resource governance theory, this Note calls for rethinking information moderation on social media by shifting the onus of moderation from the company to the People through a vote-to-moderate system, where users participate directly in content moderation.

Download

Share

COinS