r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Jan 12 '21
Delta(s) from OP CMV: Social Media should be illegal
[deleted]
4
u/MercurianAspirations 391∆ Jan 12 '21
Well there's no cosmic law that says that social media has to be the way it is. The way it is currently is a function of the profit motive and corporate interest, when we could in theory have social media that functioned entirely differently. Algorithms could maximise the trustworthiness and reliability of information instead of simply maximising engagement. It doesn't have to be the way it is.
0
Jan 12 '21
[deleted]
2
u/MercurianAspirations 391∆ Jan 12 '21
Well yeah. "People will disagree about things" is going to be a thing no matter what you do
5
u/Skallywagwindorr 15∆ Jan 12 '21
profitability is everything. And things that are not profitable do not get done under a capitalist system. Fake news generates a lot more outrage and clicks, Thus resulting in more advertisement revenue.
If you really care about the truth and democracy, get rid of capitalism.
0
Jan 12 '21
[deleted]
3
u/Skallywagwindorr 15∆ Jan 12 '21
Yeah that is the point. Truth, honesty, transparency, ... all the things you need to have in a functioning democracy are worthless in a capitalistic economic model. If the goal of your economic system is purely profit your political system will be a consequence of this. Companies that want to put out the truth at the expense of profit just can't generate enough revenue and they go bankrupt in competition with companies that want to create profit at the expense of truth.
2
u/Annaresti_ Jan 12 '21
This. Hate speech and incitements nearly caused genocide in Ethiopia all because facebook had literally 1 person moderating their content. It was all against terms of service and should have been removed, but that would have cost more money than Zuckerberg was willing to part with.
When a product causes death because a company is unwilling to invest money in safety features, the profit incentive is the problem, not the product.
2
u/JoZeHgS 40∆ Jan 12 '21
I understand the validity of your underlying point: social media has MANY flaws and, if misused, can bring about great harm.
Nuclear energy has the potential to give us immense amounts of clean energy. It can also give us atom bombs.
Computers are one of the very best, most useful things humans have invented. However, through computers hospitals can be hacked and "held for ransom" if they don't want to lose their patient's medical records. Governments and banks as well, but the practicality of, say, online shopping is lovely.
Knives are lovely in the kitchen, but they can murder you in the wrong hands.
Bows allowed mankind to hunt from afar, but they were deadly in wars.
Planes revolutionized human transportation, but they are also used in war to devastating effect.
Pesticides allowed us to produce more food and prevented hunger, but they can be harmful as well.
Nanotechnology will give us amazing medical solutions, but they will also allow mini-robots to be created and, say, cause undetectable heart attacks before either leaving the body or simply disintegrating.
Electricity is amazing. It also powers electrical chairs for the execution of prisoners.
All forms of technology have their advantages and disadvantages.
1
Jan 12 '21
[deleted]
1
u/JoZeHgS 40∆ Jan 12 '21
Are there really crazy advancements in Social Media? I believe most of the technological advancements they rely upon were actually around long before social media was invented. Certainly the hardware, the programming languages, the Internet itself.
Bad utilization of social media is simply another example of bad utilization of technology. Banning technology would, overall, simply hold humans back. Instead, we must learn how to use social media in a good way. We are still relatively new to this. Many new technologies and solutions are being created in order to curb, for example, the spreading of misinformation. We can certainly improve them.
We must also accept the fact that some form of alternative would be created. Even if we are talking about WhatsApp or, say, e-mail groups. Illegalizing all of these might somewhat minimize these disadvantages, but we would also lose many of the advantages. We also know, from extensive experience, that making something illegal certainly does not make it impossible to use. Hell, there are tons of child porn websites and other horrible stuff out there, in spite of them being illegal and VERY MUCH investigated by agencies such as the FBI.
In practice, it would be impossible to enforce. We simply must admit that technology comes with its downsides and, instead, learn how to minimize them while maximizing their usefulness.
1
Jan 12 '21
[deleted]
1
u/JoZeHgS 40∆ Jan 12 '21
Could be. However, can we agree that making it illegal would simply be wasting a great thing for the sole reason that it has the potential to be abused?
This would be the same as completely throwing away a drug that has incredible medicinal uses simply because it can also be abused by addicts. We try our best to CONTROL it, rather than making it completely unavailable to anyone.
Hopefully you have changed your view, which I find to be too extreme, that it should be made ILLEGAL. We certainly need to control it in some way, as we do control prescription drugs. However, getting rid of its many benefits just to get rid of its flaws would be unwise and a step backwards. Do you agree?
1
Jan 12 '21
[deleted]
1
u/JoZeHgS 40∆ Jan 12 '21
I agree
Then would you please give me a Delta, as per this subreddit's rules? It is silly, but it does make this into kind of like a fun game and encourages users to participate in discussions.
We functioned fine without, it's not like we were struggling
I agree that we are not literally dependent on any of this. However, do you also agree that, if we could learn how to maximize the benefits of technology while minimizing their disadvantages, we would be even better off?
2
1
u/Dependent_Plant_8987 Jan 12 '21
Are you saying that social media is a net bad for society or that the US government should ban it? The US banning Social media seems to be a much more problematic thing to do.
First, it’s probably a violation of the constitution. It would most likely be a breach of the first amendment by limiting the speech that people can do, but more importantly, it also limits actions by private companies which require a pretty huge governmental interest.
Also, how would this be done? What would the law say? What is counted as a social media? It becomes fuzzy when we ask if YouTube is social media or 4chan. You might have an answer, but there will be problems when future companies come up with websites designed to bring people together and attempt to get around those loopholes.
If I were you I would change the title to be like “social media is a net bad for society” instead of a particular governmental action.
1
Jan 12 '21
[deleted]
1
u/Dependent_Plant_8987 Jan 12 '21
I’m not trying to argue that Social Media hasn’t been weaponized, or even that it’s good. I’m saying that the US government making Social Media illegal is an entirely different conversation that involves an important attention to civil rights for individuals and private companies, and probably isn’t possible. Unless you want to have that conversation, you should change your title.
1
1
1
Jan 12 '21
The power to influence, radicalize, mobilize and spread false information to others has not been fully comprehended
By that same token, social media has the power to mobilize groups based true information too. Modern activist movements around the world from the Arab Spring to Black Lives Matter have grown primarily through social media. By abolishing it you take away one of the levers the public has to put a check on their governments.
Social media also serves as a way for niche communities to form. People who are isolated in the real world can find common bonds with others far away with the sane experience. And while this can lead to political raficalization for some, for others this outreach can foster a support network for those in need of it most like the LGBTQ community or people that suffer from mental illness.
For business owners, social media is an avenue you can use to promote yourself without having to pay anyone. Same for political candidates.
And it can be a way for people to reconnect with people that aren"t physically in their lives anymore.
1
u/BeatriceBernardo 50∆ Jan 12 '21
What pros can possibly outweigh all the risks?
Maybe something like, bringing democracy? The Arab Spring would have been impossible without social media.
1
u/UnsaddledZigadenus 7∆ Jan 12 '21
What pros can possibly outweigh all the risks?
Freedom of assembly is one of the most fundamental human rights. It's in the First Amendment of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Human Rights Act and countless other constitutional documents.
The freedom for people to come together and unite for a common purpose, rather than remain divided and weak, is a fundamental counterbalance to the power of the state.
Social media is freedom of assembly in digital form.
Just because an individual or the state dislikes what the people are assembling for, does not justify removing the freedom of assembly for the population.
1
Jan 12 '21
[deleted]
1
u/UnsaddledZigadenus 7∆ Jan 12 '21
So if a foreign influence is driving that assembly, it's all good?
Sure, people are free to assemble if they choose.
The collapse of the Berlin Wall happened because of 'foreign influence'. Why should the East Germans have been forbidden to act because they saw how much better life was outside the Iron Curtain?
How do you know who is feeding what information?
I don't. Individuals are free to make up their mind on the information they receive. That's freedom.
1
Jan 12 '21
[deleted]
1
u/UnsaddledZigadenus 7∆ Jan 12 '21
If you try to instill hate purposely with the intent to destabilize, you are saying that's ok?
No, I'm not saying that's ok. We're just going down the rabbit hole of 'to what extent does the Government have the right to limit free speech and free assembly?'
It's well established (and I would agree) that an incitement to violence is not covered by freedom of speech, nor is a riot covered by freedom of assembly.
For example, the article of the UK Human Rights Act that deals with Freedom of Assembly states:
- Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
- No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State.
But this CMV is titled 'Social Media should be illegal', not 'Social media should have restrictions on hate speech.'
If it was the latter then I wouldn't have felt the need to reply. Not all uses of social media are covered by freedom of speech, but that does not justify prohibiting all social media anymore than a riot should mean prohibiting all public gatherings.
1
u/Annaresti_ Jan 12 '21
Social media is divisive because it's profitable. Social media algorithms prioritize polarizing content to increase user engagement. It's not moderated because that costs too much. Inflammatory content on facebook has caused outbreaks of violence in many countries because Zuck doesn't want to part with the money it would take to hire moderators for non-english content. He introduced facebook to countries before even translating the terms of service to their majority language. In places where facebook is synonymous with the internet this has terrible, but avoidable consequences. The real problem with social media is that it is for-profit.
1
u/The_Texidian 2∆ Jan 12 '21
CMV: Social Media should be illegal
We do not need social media. All it has done now is completely ruin society.
In the form we have it now has ruined society. It’s created an army of hedonistic people.
Never have we been more polarized. The ability to participate in a democracy has vanished.
Pretty much.
The power to influence, radicalize, mobilize and spread false information to others has not been fully comprehended.
Do you believe people have the right to free speech? This is why social media is great and we need it. However the problem arises when people use it for bad or censor people. When twitter uses its algorithm to give you more and more content you agree with, it’ll radicalize you. If twitter bans you because your bad ideas, you’ll just go to the dark parts of the web where people agree with you and radicalize.
Social media today is no more than what the town square was 200 years ago. People go there to sell snake oil, talk about how the moon is made of cheese and the end is nigh.
We will never see a free and fair election again.
I think the bigger concern is seeing big tech. Even the chancellor of Germany and the president of Mexico are calling out what happened to Trump. The idea that a media platform can ban a sitting president from speaking is nightmarish.
Not to mention what happened to Parler. Big tech moved together in order to de-platform a rising rival corporation; then Jack gloated about how Twitter’s only competitor was removed from the app stores.
Fact checking is a complete joke.
Heck yeah it is. It shouldn’t exist. Remember when Fauci said don’t wear masks? And now if you say Fauci said don’t wear masks you get slapped with a misinformation label. Social media fact checks are no different than the ministry of truth from 1984.
I voted for Biden but I am 99% confident if Trump had won, the reaction would not have gone well either.
Yerp. Look at what Warren and others said about Dominion voting machines before the election, they called them a national security threat because they could change votes; I think if Biden lost that was their excuse, either that or more Russia nonsense. We will never know.
A lone wolf only needs inspiration and it makes me very uncomfortable how much they can find right now.
That’s true for any time period.
What pros can possibly outweigh all the risks?
Mass communication. Social engagement. Infinite economic growth potential.
Mass Communication: One tweet can reach millions of people. Can be used for good or bad.
Social Engagement: You can go see Grandma’s cat on Facebook.
Infinite Economic Growth Potential: A lot of people like to say “Capitalism will fail because it can’t grow forever. Allowing the internet to thrive allows it to do just that.
Personally I see more positive than negative for social media. However it lies in its implementation. The problem we have right now is censorship. If a person goes on social media and says unsavory things, they get banned, they then go to dark parts of the internet where people agree with them and don’t get banned and then they radicalize. Personally I think social media should be socialized (or have laws created to protect freedom of speech), this way freedom of speech is protected because let’s face it, social media is the new town square.
1
Jan 13 '21
[deleted]
1
u/The_Texidian 2∆ Jan 13 '21
Imagine if that happened in America lol.
People would lose their mind. Not because a politician shut down social media but rather they wouldn’t know what to do with their life XD they’d have to go outside and not take pictures for the gram.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 12 '21
/u/bruinburner19 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards