The advances in technology have led to the spread of the use of social media as a tool of communication. Several factors promote the platform of communication. They include the convenience of communication, availability of communication gadgets, and the reduced cost of communication. Social media comes with features that were not available in the traditional forms of communication (Howard, 2017). For instance, information easily becomes viral due to the interconnectivity of social media. The platforms necessitate the possibility of networking by bringing together individuals with similar interests and goals to collaborate and interact with one another. Social media promotes social networking for social groups such as churches, families, schools, and groups. The increasing presence of the internet in remote parts of the world promotes the use of social media as a means of communication. However, there has been a rising concern about the misuse of the platform. There must be proper mechanisms for regulating communications in social media.
In the world today, digital technology has become the main arena for disseminating information. The Internet has been the key mode for facilitating communication. However, there is a need to have regulatory measures to oversee the operation of communication processes. Many government systems have controlled and contained the flow of information. The rising concern is the challenge of controlling computer-mediated communication (Langvardt, 2017). That has hiked the problem of controlling communication. To effectively control the flow of communication, countries have adopted strict regulatory measures (Kayode-Adedeji, 2017). Many democratic societies have attempted to establish restrictions on online communication, which is the main form of communication. It has been coupled with the development of legislative measures. The internet has posed a major challenge in terms of regulation. The complexity of the internet makes it difficult to track the flow of communication as many communication platforms arise. Nations grapple with privacy and freedom issues with regard to the dissemination of information.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Indeed, the advent of communication technology has opened up the world and encouraged globalization. Consequently, there have been changes in the way people interact with one another. It has further increase cultural diffusion as people can easily spread their cultures through the internet. Social media becomes the most used form of communication; all ages use it. Since it is the fastest growing form of communication, social media poses challenges in terms of cultural diffusion. Some users have used social media against others. The recent US presidential elections are an example of the controversial use of the platform (Howard, 2017). The misuse of the form of communication necessitates the need to develop regulatory measures. It is unfortunate that the development of standard regulatory measures has been a serious challenge. It has been possible to come up with international regulations that govern the use of the internet.
The need to regulate social media is evident in the Brexit and the 2016 US presidential elections. It is important to note that social sites are business forums that are used to interlink business players with common interests. Holding the platforms liable for information in them is not possible. Instead, the parties using platforms are responsible for creating the contents. Social media platforms, therefore, claim that they are never responsible for misconduct in the sites but pass the responsibility to users (Kayode-Adedeji, 2017). The controversy has been whoever should be held accountable for the atrocities in the platforms. While traditional media generalizes audience and journalists, social media is specific in terms of who provides the content and the audience that the contents intend to reach. It is high time regulations were set to help in controlling social media content (O'Connor, 2013). Though there is freedom of speech, it should come with responsibility.
The European Union came up with regulatory mechanisms against atrocities on the internet. They task social media platforms to exclude contents that embrace extremism lest they receive fine. The EU also has the General Data Protection Regulation which controls platforms on the usage and storage of data. China restricts the use of WhatsApp, Google, and Twitter within its boundaries; instead, it uses Baidu, WeChat, and Weibo. Australia has the Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material Act of 2019, which regulates what social media users are able to share. According to the legislation, offenders risk jail or penalties. Germany enacted the NetzDG law that compelled organizations to pull down contents that were illegal. However, opponents argue that regulation of the sites infringes on the freedom of expression (Langvardt, 2017). The 1st Amendment in the US grants citizens freedom of speech. It includes electronic forms such as social media. The critics allege that individuals must be allowed to speak their minds without restrictions.
Creating awareness is necessary to guide social media users. It is good to celebrate freedom of speech. However, avoiding holding parties accountable goes against the interest of the public. Social media polarization has been evident in the last two US presidential elections with platforms like Twitter having to suspend some accounts (Howard, 2017). Social media platforms must be regulated to avert the possible harm that they are likely to cause to the public. It has become evident that there is a monopolization of interests by the social platforms which does not conform with the social welfare of the public. There have been accusations of the cultivation of private data to be used for business purposes. The issue of freedom of speech in social media has even gained political attention as various alignment take sides.
Evidently, the advent of social media has posed a challenge between the flow of information and law. There are arguments that the law lacks the appropriate structure to deal with crimes in social media. The complexity of the platforms makes it difficult to develop an articulate mechanism that can help in tracking the flow of information. The government has the mandate to enact legislations that deal with the dynamics in technology in such cases as social media. While the current legislations do not cover the responsibility of parties involved in social media, proper laws should capture the complexities posed by the current flow of information in social media. Another challenge is the issue of freedom of speech (Howard, 2017). New regulations should consider integrating the protection of public interest with freedom of speech while providing a distinction between the two. People should not view the regulation of the platforms as interference to their activities.
Regulation of social media is crucial in protecting the public interest. The advent of communication technology has led to an increase in the use of platforms as the major forms of communication (Kayode-Adedeji, 2017). However, there is the challenge of misuse of the platforms as people tend to abuse them. While there are no proper regulations that can handle the complexities of the flow of information in social media, it is the government’s responsibility to beef surveillance on what happens on the platforms. The sites argue that they never the owners of the contents, therefore, they should not take responsibility, instead, users should be held responsible. Another challenge comes in the balance between protecting the public interest and the freedom of speech. The 1st Amendment grants citizens freedom of speech. Critics argue that social media users should be free to speak their minds.
References
Howard, D. M. (2017). Can Democracy Withstand the Cyber Age: 1984 in the 21st Century. Hastings LJ , 69 , 1355.
Kayode-Adedeji, T. (2017). Regulating the social media for global relationships. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences , 4 (10), 426-433.
Langvardt, K. (2017). Regulating online content moderation. Geo. LJ , 106 , 1353.
O'Connor, D. (2013). The apomediated world: regulating research when social media has changed research. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , 41 (2), 470-483.
Yik, C. C. (2013). Regulating social media: Regulating life (and lives). In Workshop report on Social media, regulation and freedom of expression, at Hong Kong Baptist University. Retrieved from https://www. academia. edu/8730307/social_media .
