Are you implying that Facebook is a publisher?

Section 230 makes no distinction between "publishers" and "platforms", at least not where the ability to moderate or editorialize content is concerned. It doesn't require a platform to be politically neutral, or to only moderate content which is strictly illegal, nor does it forbid the exercise of editorial discretion.

Facebook is allowed to do what they're doing and the question of whether that makes them a "publisher" or "platform" isn't relevant.

... I'm just assuming that's where you were going with this. Here's an exhausting HN thread on an Ars Technica article explaining further:

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24803998

[1]https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/section-230-the-...

They're the publisher of things they write and publish themselves. For example, the Facebook engineering blog. They are not the publisher of what their users post, even if they perform moderation of that content. That's the law. There's no "publisher"/"platform" hat that a company has to select before going into business.

Are you implying 'publisher' is a special category with special legal privileges and/or obligations?

more responsibility under US and other nations' laws. Basically publisher is liable for publishing hate speech - platforms are not.

There is no liability for publishing hate speech in the US.

There is also, crucially, no liability for not publishing hate speech in the US.