When "platforms" editorialize content for the purposes of manipulating user behaviour, rather than merely to act in users' interests in helping them find what they want, then I'm in favour of them losing protection.
HN does the latter, so I think it'd be appropriate for HN to keep its protection.
1 The Attention Economy: Where the Customer Becomes the Product – https://journal.businesstoday.org/bt-online/2021/the-attenti...
2 Forget Data. Free Labor Is Facebook’s Lifeblood – https://mashable.com/article/free-labor-facebook-profits
3 Williams, James. 2018. Stand Out of Our Light: Freedom and Resistance in the Attention Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4 The Scientists Who Make Apps Addictive – https://web.archive.org/web/20210416052902/https://www.econo...
5 A Call To Minimize Distraction – http://www.minimizedistraction.com/
6 Slow Tech – https://vimeo.com/240721308, transcript at https://www.interaxiongroup.org/sites/default/files/media/pd...
7 Ethics of the Attention Economy: The Problem of Social Media Addiction – https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2020.32
8 Odell, J. (2019). How to do nothing: Resisting the attention economy. Melville House.
YC runs Hacker News and invests its resources into promotion of YC companies' job ads, hoping to increase return on its investment.
Wikipedia pays high salaries to its executives, the money that it derives from its user's donations.
Strip them all of Section 230 protection?