Amid the growing wave of litigation concerning the public’s right to access the social media accounts of politicians or other elected officials, The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has received a number of concerns regarding the ability of governmental or public institutions blocking users from accessing its social media content. There are many reasons why governmental or public institutions chose to block access to some content. But the big question is “ When is it permissible governmental or public institutions, such as schools and universities, to block users or certain individuals, including students, on social media?” The goal of this paper is to argue if it is morally permissible for such institutions to block users on social media.
Public institutions, such as public universities, are bound by the First Amendment. Therefore, these institutions are required to uphold the freedoms of speech, press, and expression. Since these institutions are bound by the First Amendment, the question then becomes what their intent was behind the creation of the social media account. In the U.S., the Supreme Court introduced “forum analysis” into the First Amendment doctrine (Burchard, par. 2). Forum Analysis was introduced specifically to assess the expressive freedoms that are associated with certain social media platforms or certain places.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In the consensus of public forum doctrine, there are 3 categories of forums when it comes to the access of expressive activities. These categories are; “Traditional Public Forums,” “Limited Public Forums,” and “Non-public Forums” (Hudson, par. 5). In a “traditional public forum,” expressive rights are given the highest level of protection. This is due to the fact that such places have been utilized for expression. Therefore, in such places, expressions can only be restricted through reasonable regulations that serve a significant governmental interest.
In a “designated public forum,” expressive rights receive the highest level of protection, just like in “traditional public forum,” provided that the forum remains open. It is vital to note that the government can close the forum at any time. However, the government has to do so in a manner that is consistent with the obligations of the First Amendment.
When it comes to a “limited public forum,” an entity may provide an issue for discussion and prohibit the expression of unrelated matters. However, the entity ought not to bar the expression simply because they disagree with the message. Lastly, an entity or institution may not be “a public forum” at all. These types of forums are referred to as “non-public forums.” An example of such a forum is a military base. In such forums, the government institution has the right to regulate speech.
Assuming the social media of a governmental or public institution, such as a university, constitutes a type of public forum, if the university’s social media account retains the right to block users or specific individuals, including students, the account may be classified as a “limited public forum” (Burchard, 2017). Arguably, in such a case, it is constitutionally right and morally permissible for the institution to block certain users from contributing to certain types of contents.
According to Liao (par. 3), it is important to determine what blocking does when answering the question of “When is it morally permissible for governmental or public institutions to block users on social media?” Blocking prevents a user from commenting on a platform, excludes a user from a conversation, and is akin to muting a user. Given the many forms of harassment issues that continue to plague social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter, “blocking is perfectly reasonable, and undoubtedly permissible” for private citizens as it helps them protect their time, attention, and mental health (Liao, par. 4). Thus, private citizens have the right to block any users for any reason.
However, this is never the case in governmental or public institutions. This is because there is a significant difference between private citizens and such institutions in terms of power and the ways these institutions are entrenched in our social reality. The interactions on our social media accounts usually shape and contribute to our social reality (Liao, par. 8). The language used on social media is not only a speech but actions that have the capacity to modify the social world. Based on this perspective, an individual can accept the difference between blocking and muting. Blocking tends to prevent an individual from commenting or taking part in the conversation.
So, there is no simple answer to the question of when it is morally permissible for universities to block users on social media. However, based on the arguments presented by Liao, the answer critically depends on the context. In other words, the answer to this question depends on whether blocking users on social media adds to ongoing unjust structures that are prevalent in our social reality. If the answer yes, then it not morally permissible for these institutions to block users or prevent certain individual from accessing their social media. The answer to this question also depends on whether the institution is a “Traditional Public Forums,” “Limited Public Forums,” and “Non-public Forums.” If an institution is “limited public forum,” then it is constitutionally right and morally permissible for the institution to block certain users from contributing certain types of contents.
References
Burchard, Kendall. (2017). ‘Block U’? Universities grapple with blocking users on social media. [Online]. Retrieved February 20, 2020, from https://www.thefire.org/block-u-universities-grapple-with-blocking-users-on-social-media/
Hudson, David. (2020). Public forum doctrine. (2020). [Online]. Retrieved February 20, 2020, from https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/824/public-forum-doctrine
Liao, Shen-Yi. Institutions’ right to block: ICAO vs. Taiwan. (2020). [Online]. Retrieved February 20, 2020, from https://www.prindlepost.org/2020/02/institutions-right-to-block-icao-vs-taiwan/
