According to Gary and Soltani, it would be more effective to employ a framework for regulating platforms not by mandating specific content based regulations, but by addressing the financial incentive structure created by targeted advertising model.

Specific content based regulations such as built in algorithms that detect fake news and acts of blacklisting and whitelisting don't always work and raise constitutional concerns with regards to free speech and civil rights.

Problems with blacklisting: it is usually done after huge pressure from the public; banning accounts is disadvantageous for social media platforms because their business model depends on the number of active users; accounts are banned after they violate a policy; it requires platforms to identify pseudonym accounts, which infringes on the right to free association and to speak anonymously

Problems with whitelisting: relies on determinations about the speaker, not the speech; there are many mainstream new sources and speakers that engage in the spread of misinformation, and it legitimizes and grants recognition to such outlets and speakers

Problems with direct content filtering: creates the most direct potential issues with the First Amendment; private platforms can legally remove content and have almost limitless power to shape online speech, promoting voices that are financially beneficial to them while suppressing others

What the authors propose: for congress to challenge the structural practices of the platforms; increasing data privacy and security by restricting how personal data can be collected and used for advertising; restricting the kind of data that can be gathered; ensuring that certain kinds of data don't be used for commercial purposes; restrict the kind of data that could be shared with third parties; focusing on business behavior rather than individual user behavior