Browsers are difficult Please wait, loading your map...
Should the governmentregulate social mediacompanies like Twitter andFacebook?You decide!1.1DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:1. The pro-regulation side has a major premise that social mediacompanies act more like publishers than platforms, since they pickand choose which content they allow. How persuasive is thisargument, and why?2. How concerned should we be about conspiracy theories and echochambers developing on social media?3. Would regulating social media lead to increased or decreasedfreedom of speech for individual users? Support your answer withfacts and evidence.YES, social media companies shouldbe regulated like publishers1.3Social mediacompanies act likepublishers by pickingand choosing whatcontent they allow ontheir platforms2.1Social mediacompanies block andcensor content3.1Twitter claims to"fact-check" whatTrump says4.1Social media companiesare arguably biasedagainst right-leaningcontent4.2Republican SenatorTed Cruz claimed thatTwitter censors thosewho don't agree withthem5.1Of 22 prominent,politically activeindividuals who areknown to have beensuspended since 2005and who expressed apreference in the2016 US presidentialelection, 21supported DonaldTrump5.2Twitter censored aNew York Post articleand later had toreverse that decisionafter beingchallenged4.3Blocking andcensoring content isacting like a publisher3.2If they are acting likepublishers, then theyshould be regulatedlike publishers2.2Social mediaplatforms have amonopoly oninformation andmany people rely onthem2.3More than two thirdsof American adultsreceive at least someof their news fromsocial media3.3Over 3.6 billionpeople worldwide usesocial media3.4We should regulatethings that manypeople rely on forbasic services such asnews and information2.4Social mediacompanies aren'tneutral: they'redesigned to feed onour worst negativeemotions2.5"'Hot emotions thatset hearts racing,such as anger, fearand sex, tend to bemore contagious.' Ifthese topics tend toget passed aroundmore, it’s likely thatalgorithms willexacerbate thecontagion."3.5A 5000-person studyfound that highersocial media usecorrelated with self-reported declines inmental and physicalhealth and lifesatisfaction3.6Social mediacontributes topolitical polarization3.7“Social media siteslike Twitter power upconfirmation bias...You have an opinionon one thing, yournatural confirmationbias will gear youtowards acceptingnews and stories thatappeal to youropinion, and thenTwitter or Facebookfurther encapsulatesyou into a filterbubble."4.4The number ofcountries withpoliticaldisinformationcampaigns on socialmedia doubled in thepast 2 years4.564% of people whojoined extremistgroups on Facebookdid so because thealgorithms steeredthem there4.6We should holdcompaniesaccountable for socialand emotional harm2.6NO, social media companies shouldbe treated as neutral platforms1.4Social mediacompanies do notactually have an anti-conservative bias2.7Conservatives actuallydominate socialmedia3.8Facebook tends tocreate echo chambersthat promote right-wing content3.9Regulating thesecompanies likepublishers will onlycause them to doubledown on censorship2.8If companies are heldresponsible for thecontent on theirplatform, they willovercorrect andregulate too muchcontent3.10Democratic skepticsargue that if Section230 is jettisoned, techplatforms would haveto do more to curbproblematic content3.11Regulating socialmedia could infringeon the free speechrights of individualsusing the platforms2.9Every individual hasthe First Amendmentright to freedom ofspeech3.12People's free speechrights are increasinglybeing exercised onsocial media as theprimary place wherepeople communicateand share ideas3.13Social mediacompanies shouldn'tbe held responsiblefor every single pieceof content that goeson their platforms2.10Social mediaplatforms host amassive volume ofcontent3.14Every minute:Snapchat users shareover 500,000 photos;Youtube users watchover 4,000,000videos;Instagram users post46,000 photos4.7On Facebook, morethan 300 millionphotos get uploadedper day and there are500,000 commentsposted every minute4.8We can't expect socialmedia companies tobe held responsiblefor such a largevolume of content3.15BACKGROUND:The U.S. has a law called Section 230 of the Communications DecencyAct, which states "No provider or user of an interactive computerservice shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any informationprovided by another information content provider." This law wascreated so Internet Service Providers (such as Comcast or AT&T) couldprovide content but not be held responsible for what everyone says onthe internet. This same legislation also applies to social mediacompanies like Facebook and Twitter, but they have come under firefor using it to evade responsibility. Some lawmakers are calling forSection 230 to be reformed and treat social media companies as"publishers" instead, while other lawmakers want Section 230 toremain the same or even be removed.1.2

Created using MindMup.com