My opinion of ISPs being not made more responsible is also backed by the idea of freedom of speech. I believe it is the birthright of anybody living in this country to have a say of whatever he or she wants. It should not become a policing matter at all. By taking away the immunity provided to ISPs by the government, will allow them to block or edit whatever they deem is unnecessary or can be used to promote negative emotions which would be equivalent of enforcing their own it on their user, and violate the basic human right of free speech.
I also believe it is the moral and social responsibility of all, to stop or at least try to stop any offensive activity that is witnessed. It is through this general protection fabric only that a society is protected from a number of evils. I am a strong believer in privacy as well and think that forcing ISPs to monitor the contents of their users would be equivalent to saying, which would be an invasion of privacy. Though it is right to demand a system to curb negative activities such as terrorism or its propagation or other hate-related activities that go on the Internet, I believe that it is more of an individual responsibility than organizational. Adults generally are well capable of taking care of themselves and possess enough knowledge and decision power to differentiate between good and bad.
The minors need assistance in taking such decision in their life anyway, and parents already take responsibility of guiding them. Therefore, I also believe that the government has done the right things by delegating the censorship powers to the parents as it gives them more power and choice to choose for themselves to filter only what they find offensive. Furthermore, I believe that the parents are in the right position to implement a censorship control as well, as they do not have to do much to exercise such as control apart from installing and configuring software, contrary to ISPs who will have to install a number of expensive devices as well as bring change to their network in order to accommodate for such facility. Furthermore, even if the ISPs would want to curb down on the availability of offensive material, the waiver of immunity provided under section 230 to them won’t be enough, the majority of such websites have their host in countries where laws are not as stringent as the United States and thus they are able to operate (Spinello and Tavani). For example, many torrents websites such as Pirate Bay continue to provide hosting for illegal or pirated software.