Media censorship is known to be a global wonder which has predicted the outlets of the information. The primary ground for censorship is the preservation of a peaceful state, and on the other hand, the fundamental aim is to maintain a public oblivious of the data available which can affect their relationship with the authorities. Taking into consideration the global internet, connectivity in the present-day issues permits the transfer of information over and above the borders in less time. Consequently, the rising number of the consumer of media depends primarily on the internet for a significant piece of information. From a historical point of view, having significant access to the real and honest news has not been accessible to date. It has given room to fake news which has corrupted the mind of the young people in society. This corruption is associated with social media as it is the biggest challenge that inhibits the mind of the young people, and through it, transferring false information from one person to another is fast and easy. This paper will address why it is vital to implement social media censorship and at the same time, portray truthful and honest information which will not affect decency, ethics, and morality of the presented information.
Societal Problem
Implementing the social media censorship is essential to all people across the globe because it gives people the power and the right to express themselves regarding the matters affecting the world and how they perceive them and what they think should do. According to the social media theorist such as Jurgen Habermas recommended that the power associated with the internet has both positives reason it should be implemented and also negative reasons ( Kumar & Agrawal, 2017 ). Its usage depends significantly on the state government. Jurgen opines that t he Internet has certainly reactivated the grassroots of an impartial public of writers and readers.” However, computer-mediated communication in the web can claim unequivocal democratic merits only for an appropriate context. Essentially, it can undermine the censorship of authoritarian regimes that try to control and repress public opinion ( Archer, 2016 ) . In the context of liberal regimes, the rise of millions of fragmented chat rooms across the world tends instead to lead to the fragmentation of large but politically focused mass audiences into a huge number of isolated issue public. Within established national public spheres, the online debates of web users only promote political communication, when newsgroups crystallize around the focal points of the quality press, for example, national newspapers and political magazines."
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Principal among the problems that social media censorship brings is spreading of hate speech and fake news. For example, most of the times, internet users have killed many people on various online platforms. This kind of fake news is associated with how people relate with one another and what they want to achieve from spreading such fake news. The other global problem is hate-speech. For example, in America, racial discrimination is intense, and people use the online platform to pass hate speech that can result in violence. One of the instances is where the African American people living in the USA are as criminals. Even if they have legally earned their way up, this kind of speech or news can cause mayhem between the two racial such as the whites and the blacks leading to violence.
Consequently, the governments across the world need to regulate the manner into which people use the internet to control social media censorships problems. One way to control hate speech is invading the privacy of internet users. Even though it is illegal, the government must apply the utilitarianism Act, whereby they will opt to break the ethical or moral aspects of the users and protect the general public. Also, the government can impose rules and regulations which people who pass fake news should be judged, and they should compensate the victim for damaging their reputation. It will minimize the passage of wrong information.
Why this is a Societal Problem
Censorship is utilized across the world to suppress and control the expression that is deemed to cause mayhem across the globe or even a single country within the world. In the past, censorships have been implemented to the latter to regulate public awareness, public morals, and also as a way of silencing the opposition. One instance where censorship has taken place is in 399 BC, where Socrates died because they took poison as a way of acknowledging the divinities of the unorthodox. Even if the Socrates had the personal right to do what they had planned to do, according to the public, it was wrong. It is because the kind of information they were passing to the general public was wrong and could have jeopardized the livelihoods of the people when they came to a point where their views were unconsidered. To show the public what the Socrates did was not right and was against the law of the state, they had to be sentenced to death so that the general population could not undertake such actions again. From a traditional point of view, the government has used censorships to analyze various media ( Best, 2017 ). Examples include movies, news broadcasts, books, magazines, newspaper, and social media usually before release to redact some of the questionable information.
Despite the effort of the government to put into practice the censorship rules and regulations, many activists have come up to fight the government by chanting various slogans that are aimed to go censorship. They argue that the government is limiting their freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and contamination of statements ( Govindarajan & Ravindar, 2016). Due to this, the state global social media problems exist because first, the social media platforms controlled by anybody and second, people can use various online platforms to pass wrong information in the way of blackmailing people. For example, Facebook Owner Zuckerberg got questioned for not maintaining or approving the right information written on people's Facebook pages. He responded that it is not easy to differentiate whether people mean what they post, or they are just joking or making a commentary out of the issues that are within the public domain.
Proposed Solutions
Controlling the information passed through the internet remains an unsolved challenge, but existing information can be censored either through stealthily or visibly. The states which want to seem to the broader perspective of the world as the democratic nations accept the stealth censorships. This kind of censorships involves getting rid of annoying information on social media. According to statistics, at least ten billion people across the world use the internet. In essence, when a person sends fake news or a certain kind of hate speech, it means that the information will reach all the ten billion people in a few.
Controlling social media problems takes the standard form of invading people's social media platforms. In effect, one can construe this as a way of controlling people's speech or information passed on media platforms ( Reuter & Scholl, 2014 ). Even though this is unethical, it is regarded as significant because the government will know who among the internet users are spreading the wrong information. According to the act of utilitarianism, the government or the government body regulating the spreading the information through the online platform is illegally invading people's privacy. This act is legal but immoral. Since it is legal, they have the right to access people's information and take necessary actions to people who spread fake news and hate speech.
According to Balkin (2018), speech regulation uses censorships, which deals with private governance, new school speech, and old school speech regulations. The writer stipulates how the law demands social media to eliminate hate speech. Therefore, with the implementation of social media censorship, it is possible to eliminate propaganda, fake news, and hate speech.
The other proposed solution is proposing laws that regulate what people should post on their social media platforms and what they are not supposed to post. For example, in Kenya, a person had posted in a social media platform that he was to attack the Kenyan president. Since this information is, in fact, a threat to the life of the president, the statement from the Kenya statehouse disclosed that legal measures were undertaken against the person. Since posting such kind of information affects the government, the rules and regulations imposed by the Kenyan government will be applied, and the culprit will have to pay for the crime committed.
The above Kenyan act is equivalent to Korchmaros et al. (2013) they argued that "social media via computer-mediated communication and teen dating violence" are crucial information that gives significant evidence on how social media is becoming destructive to decency and moral concepts of the young people. Therefore, implementing the social media censorships, several positive outcomes comes out of it. Since young people are associated with the uncensored internet, controlling social media helps control various instances such as what happened in Kenya.
Interpreting Statistical Data
According to the 2018 to 2019 social media statistics, there are at least ten billion internet users across the world. Among them, at least four billion people are active on social media, and on average, a person has at least eight social media accounts (Spisak, 2019). Also, every person consumes one hundred and forty-two minutes, which is equivalent to two hours, twenty minutes on social media platforms.
From the above information, it is evident that people spend a lot of their time on social media platforms. It means that when a person posts a piece of specific information that is fake or that can be regarded as hate speech, reaching the active internet users is fast and easy. It is a clear indication that people will do react or act according to the presented data. According to Lenhart et al. (2010), they opine that most users of social media are teens and adults. It is an indication that they are active and at times they can be driven by emotions and posts things that are doubtings and also matters that can cause mayhem in an attempt to make humor out of it. This source is accurate and of objective fact, because people spend most of their time on the internet. For example, before the election of trump as the President of America, he has been criticized, and many of the opposing people used social media to pass fake news and hate speech. It saw people demonstrate in the streets when he won as a way of showing that they were not happy with the administrations.
Ethical Outcomes
Changing how people present themselves in social media is difficult and complicated. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the government to make sure that all the information presented or posted on social media does not spread hate speech or even spread fake news to the active people on the internet. The responsibility that the government initiates comes with positive and the negative impact on people. For example, when the government invades people's information, the busted people will find it as a negative implication, but the other people will positively benefit from the invasion because they will not know or they will not negatively react to the information spreading in the public domain.
While undertaking social media censorships, various ethical issues must be dealt with or experienced. For example, invading people's privacy is immoral or unethical. However, it is legal because it will save many people from unprecedented cases that may cause mayhem in a country. According to the utilitarianism act, people can do what seems beneficial if the outcome is positive. In this context, the government can implement this ethical theory and save people.
The other ethical issue is that there is no informed consent. It means that the government carries out investigations without involving the people or without seeking their approval first. It means that the government has revoked the ethical obligations and the decency that it is supposed to uphold in the public eyes. Since the matter is not in the public domain, the government has the responsibility to safeguard its secrecy in an attempt to protect the general public.
Conclusion
Having significant access to real and honest news has not been a success to most authorities. As a result, this has led to the emergence of fake news which has corrupted the mind of the people in society, especially the teenagers and the youth. This corruption is mostly associated with social media as it is the biggest challenge that inhabits the mind of the young people, and through it, transferring false information from one person to another is fast and easy. Due to this, many societal problems, like spreading hate speech and fake news. Indeed, effective measures are required to deal with these problems. Governments have to invade people's privacy and put rules and regulations that guide what people should post and not post. While undertaking the solutions, the government breaks ethical standards, particularly those addressing privacy and uninformed consent. Since such moves will be aimed chiefly at benefitting the general public, the break of ethical issues is understandable. Further, the utilitarianism act stipulates that people can do what seems beneficial if the outcome is positive.
References
Archer, D. (2016). Keywords and Moral Panics: Mary Whitehouse and Media Censorship Tony McEnery. In What's in a Word-list? (pp. 113-144). Routledge.
Balkin, J. M. (2018). Free Speech Is a Triangle. Columbia Law Review, 118(7), 2011–2055. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsh&AN=133029108&site=eds-live&scope=site
Best, J. (2017). Images of issues: Typifying contemporary social problems . Routledge.
Govindarajan, G., & Ravindar, N. (2016). Freedom of Expression on Social Media: Myth or Reality. Global Media Journal: Indian Edition, 7(1), 1–7. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=129781885&site=eds-live&scope=site
Korchmaros, J. D., Ybarra, M. L., Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., boyd, danah, & Lenhart, A. (2013). Perpetration of Teen Dating Violence in a Networked Society. CyberPsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 16(8), 561. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&AN=89768787&site=eds-live&scope=site.
Kumar, R., & Agrawal, P. (2017). Impact of Social Media in Present Scenario. Pranjana: The Journal of Management Awareness, 20(1), 31–38. https://doi-org.proxy-library.ashford.edu/10.5958/0974-0945.2017.00003.6.
Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social Media & Mobile Internet Use Among Teens and Young Adults. Millennials. Pew Internet & American life project. Image of page 2.
Reuter, C., & Scholl, S. (2014, September). Technical Limitations for Designing Applications for Social Media. In Mensch & Computer Workshopband (pp. 131-139).
Spisak, K. (2019). 2019 Social Media Trends & Statistics. Business2.com. Retrieved 11 June 2019, from https://www.business2community.com/social-media/2019-social-media- trends-statistics-02156179 .
