She denied it. She lied about it when she denied it, and when she accused Mike Masnick of being a liar about it, because she is without shame or intellectual honesty. But this?

But for all it has given us, Section 230 of the CDA has also protected some of the worst parts of the internet. If a small-town factory pollutes the water supply, the company can be held legally responsible for the negative consequences of the factory. But on the internet, armed with the protection granted by the CDA, “you can reap all the rewards for whatever it is you’re producing, and you basically will be accountable for none of the negative things that you might also be producing,” says Franks. “So unlike a factory, people can’t sue you for the negative side effects your online product.”

Tim Cushing believes Mary Anne knows better, realizes that her factory analogy is utterly absurd. But then, if she is smart enough to realize that her analogy was ridiculously inapt, then Hanlon’s Razor would dictate that her words were born of malice rather than stupidity.

Then again, Slate Tech writer, April Glazer, who briefly worked for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, had no shame about repeating such idiocy. And how many Slate readers will care about Franks’ playing them for fools if it confirms their bias that the internet is full of awful people who must be silenced?