Facebook and Twitter are media platforms created by young people who are savvy with the electronic world and who have made a fortune from their creations. Donald Trump is essentially a politician and land developer who mainly used both these media approaches to win election as the president of the United States.
Trump cleverly used this new social media to do everything from announce his personal policy for the nation as to hire and fire the very people he needs to run the country. It was a novel approach and it found favour with working class people. He gained a vast following by making promises of a return to an earlier age.
During the four years he served in the White House he antagonised many of America's friends abroad and withdrew America from some of its obligations to foster a better and safer world. When his term in office came up for renewal and he was defeated for a further four year term he falsely claimed the other side had cheated and his election victory was stolen.
Using Facebook and Twitter he convinced a multitude of redneck followers to storm the Capitol building and trash the offices of the men and women who serve the nation. There were several deaths in this confrontation which was broadcast live around the world by the media. Both Facebook and Twitter temporarily suspended Trump's access because it was being used to foster anarchy and now both have blocked him from access indefinitely.
This raises the question of whether Facebook and Twitter have a legitimate place in world community when both their conduct and policy is entirely governed by the wishes of the people who created them ? Contributors may choose to remain anonymous and input is known to originate in foreign countries where " trolls " and linked computer output can give the impression that the opinions expressed has wide support across the American nation.
Should contributors to Facebook and Twitter be forced to identify themselves and be subject to the same defamation laws for incorrect material that is published in newspapers ? We cherish our freedom of speech ability but it does have limitations. A scurrilous attack on a public figure with a tissue of lies can bring action in the courts, resulting in recovery action in the way of damages caused. This is not possible when that same attack goes to air with the accuser remaining unidentified.
Just as the proprietors of Newspapers have an obligation to be responsible for the matter their writers and correspondents commit to print, there seems little reason why Facebook and Twitter should not have the same legal restraints on the truth that adheres to what they publish.
Facebook and Twitter are popular with the public, but they are also mainly responsible for the incredible amount of " fake news " circulating in the community. What happened in Washington this week is an early warning of what is possible when public media escapes the moderating effect of the court system !
No comments:
Post a Comment