Does social media have a censorship problem? by Ryan McChrystal.
From the post:
…
It is for this reason that we should be concerned by content moderators. Worryingly, they often find themselves dealing with issues they have no expertise in. A lot of content takedown reported to Online Censorship is anti-terrorist content mistaken for terrorist content. “It potentially discourages those very people who are going to be speaking out against terrorism,” says York.Facebook has 1.5 billion users, so small teams of poorly paid content moderators simply cannot give appropriate consideration to all flagged content against the secretive terms and conditions laid out by social media companies. The result is arbitrary and knee-jerk censorship.
…
Yes, social media has a censorship problem. But not only when they lack “expertise” but when they attempt censorship at all.
Ryan’s post (whether Ryan thinks this or not I don’t know) presumes two kinds of censorship:
Bad Censorship: arbitrary and knee-jerk
Good Censorship: guided by expertise in a subject area
Bad is the only category for censorship. (period, full stop)
Although social media companies are not government agencies and not bound by laws concerning free speech, Ryan’s recitals about Facebook censorship should give you pause.
Do you really want social media companies, whatever their intentions, not only censoring present content but obliterating comments history on a whim?
Being mindful that today you may agree with their decision but tomorrow may tell another tale.
Social media has a very serious censorship problem, mostly borne of the notion that social media companies should be the arbiters of social discourse.
I prefer the hazards and dangers of unfettered free speech over discussions bounded by the Joseph Goebbels imitators of a new age.
Suggestions for non-censoring or the least censoring social media platforms?