Social Media

SOCIAL MEDIA 5

SocialMedia

SocialMedia

Thesocialmediahas significantly improvedthesocialinteractionof humanitybyavailing almosteffortlessmethodsof reachingthemasses.Withjusta clickof a button, individualscan communicate,shareorpost messages,videos,picturesamong otherpersonalandpublicitemsvia thevarioussocialmediaplatforms,suchas theFacebook, Instagram, Twitter among others.Thesesocialmediaplatformshaveincreasedworldwideforumsforexpressions,increasingandguaranteeingusers freedomsof expressions.Theincreasedglobal adoptionof thesesocialmediaplatformshas increasedtheuseof theseplatformsby businessesto advertisetheir products.Thesocialmediahas helpedbusinessesto increasebrandrecognitionandimprovebrandloyalty,which has significantly reducedthemarketingcostsamong businesses(Gomez, 2014)

Despitetheincreasedadoptionof thesocialmedia platforms,itis interestinghowtheseplatformsare usedto passviolentcontents. Someusers of digital mediaplatformsmisusetheincreasedfreedomof speechguaranteedby socialMedia to post violentcontentswhichleadto direconsequences,evenin caseswhentheyare well-intentioned.Interestingly, thesocialmediaplatformshavetheabilityandcan monitorthemselves against violentcontents whileat thesametimechampioning thefreedomof speech.Establishedsocialmediaplatformssuchas theFacebook allowsusers to ‘flag”contentsthattheyfeelare inappropriate,allowingtheir reviewandremovaliffoundviolent.Althoughthesystemof flagging may not providetheappropriatecensoring strategiesof theviolentcontent, itoffersrequisitechecksandbalancesbetween theusers andthesite.However,allowingthesocialmedia sitesto restricteverything that is viewedto be beyond extremecould resultsuppresstheexpressionof legitimateideas(Gomez,2014).

Thetroubling thingabout regulatingviolentcontents is thefactthatthere is noclearstrategyfordeterminingthatwhich is consideredviolent.In mostcases,theflagged contents are well-intentionedexpressions,mainlylyricsof lapsongsorothernon-violent actions.Thisleadsto thechallengeof drawingthelinebetween violentandnon-violent content of posted contents.Dominantactorssuchas Facebook may be incentivized to spendas littleas possiblein determiningviolentandnon-violent contents, under which casethefreedomof speechdoesnot receivea fairtrial.Thefactthatsocialmediaplatformsoperateacross diverseculturespredisposethesocialmediato violations,hencetheincreasedcasesof violentcontents across thesocialmedia platforms(Gomez,2014).

Surely,onecannot fullytrustthegiantandcentralized socialmediaplatformsto defendthefundamentalfreedomsthefreedomof speech.Assuch,thoughthesocialmedia siteshaveminimumagerequirementsfortheusers, which is vitalin protectingtheminorsagainst mediaviolence.Sincethesesocialmedia sitescollectsandstoresinformationpassed,theyhavetheabilityto determinewhena user is a minorandabout to beexposedto thecontent that has beenflaggedas inappropriate,therebydisplaya warningmessage.Theusers should thenbe freeandwaryof presumablyviolentcontent, therebymakinginformedchoiceswhetherornot to accessthepresumedviolentcontent. However,itshould be notedthattheparentsretaintheprimaryroleof protectingtheir childrenagainst theviolentcontents from socialmedia sites(Gomez,2014).

Asaforestated,socialmedia siteshavesignificantly changedsocialinteraction,givinghimchancesto interactglobally at a clickof a button.However,thediversecultureshaveledto theincreasedviolentcontents in thesesites,predisposingusers to hugedetrimentalimpact.Interestingly, thesocialmedia siteshavetheabilityto regulatetheviolentcontents, with featuressuchas flaggingandsettingtheminimumageforusers. However,there are noclearstrategiesfordeterminingwhatisconsideredviolent,with socialmediaspendingtoolittlein theprocess,henceendup infringingthefreedomof speechof theuser.

Reference

Gomez,O. (2014, December 3). can monitor itself, and protectfreedom of speech. TheNew York Times.Retrieved fromfile:///C:/Users/user/Documents/Social%20Media%20Can%20Monitor%20Itself,%20and%20Protect%20Free%20Speech%20-%20NYTimes.com.htm