WATCH: NYT Editorial Board Member Makes Staunch Claim About Free Speech

They claim that technological advancements have allowed non-journalists to spread "hate speech" and "dangerous" content. As a result, Section 230 needs to be updated to hold corporations accountable for the content that appears on their sites.

While the Supreme Court deliberates on whether companies such as Google can be held responsible for the content posted on their platforms, Scarborough dismissed the idea that it needed protection as it did in its early days, stating, "The idea that this is 1996 and we're talking about You've Got Mail or CompuServe is completely asinine."

 WATCH: NICOLE WALLACE AND THE END OF DEMOCRACY

February 24, 2023

Scarborough believes it is time for Congress to hold owners of billion-dollar corporations, such as Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, to the same standards as everyone else. He questions why these companies should be exempt from the same regulations that apply to other organizations.

 YIKES! IS MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE LOSING HER 'GRIP' IN POWER STRUGGLE?

“Isn’t it time for Congress to start holding Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk and other owners of these, these corporations, just to the same standard that everybody else is held to? Why do we carve things out for — and I would‘ve said Jack Dorsey before, and I did say that a couple years ago? This is — it’s just insanity that we’re allowing these billion-dollar corporations to have an exemption that nobody else has.”

 WATCH: FETTERMAN CONFRONTED BY A PRO-HAMAS ACTIVIST

Gay agreed with Scarborough, suggesting that the law may be outdated and that the internet has drastically altered the landscape. She added that while the First Amendment is crucial for journalists, non-journalists are now disseminating information that can be non-factual or dangerous but with no accountability for the consequences of their actions.

 TESLA IN TURMOIL: MUSK OUSTS TOP EXECS AND PREPARES FOR MASSIVE LAYOFFS, WHAT'S HAPPENING?

Gay acknowledged that determining who is a journalist and what constitutes hate speech is a difficult task. Still, she argued that corporations such as YouTube, Google, and Facebook should be held accountable if they promote hate speech on their platforms. She suggested that disseminating information tearing the country apart and spreading disinformation, as seen in the events of January 6, is a matter of concern and that the Court must recognize the actual consequences of such actions.

 PROFESSIONAL "PROTEST CONSULTANT" CAUGHT ON VIDEO STIRRING UP CHAOS AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

The case currently before the Supreme Court deals with ISIS radicalization. Scarborough and Gay's comments show how concerns over censorship and the definition of misinformation or hate speech continue to be a point of contention. As the debate rages on, it remains to be seen how the Court will rule and how lawmakers will respond to the growing call for accountability and regulation of content on the internet.