Is Social Media trashing our rights to freedom of information?

Today, in my Google Daily Digest, where I gather industry news for clients' social media sharing and my own, I came upon a post regarding Instagram's actions toward the removal of all meme or drawings that 'depict self harm or suicide.'

The article notes that the decision is in rather clear response to incidents such as mental health and suicide prevention advocates pressuring the imagery-sharing platform to "take a stronger stance on the topic since the death of 14-year-old Molly Russell — who took her own life back in 2017 after viewing content about suicide on social media."

Now, upon first read – having a pulse and no known pyscho- or sociopathy – I was, of course, touched by the efforts of the SoMe giants to do good for their fellow man, protecting them from the bullies and the malicious ne'er-do-wells out there.

Upon further thought, though...

A little Lillard-ian Cereal Killer in the back of my head screamed, "they're trashing our rights, man, trashing!!!" The age old discussion fluttered to the top of my consciousness regarding #securityvsfreedom – should they control the information we ingest or should we fight for the hold on that power, considering the risks? 

It's struck me that more and more lately I can recall reading a story or collection of stories about some ban or take-down of what has been deemed 'oppressive, malicious, or bullying' content on social media. The increase of 'content policing' by these monolithic orgs could in fact be read as a strike against our own freedoms – particularly those regarding access to information.

What about free speech?

For instance, in an article on Free Expression on Social Media, the Freedom Forum looks at the relationships between First Amendment protections against government censorship, and that while private companies that 'can censor what people post on their websites as they see fit,' their growing role in public theater makes it 'important to ask ourselves–what exactly are their censorship policies? How do they compare to each other, and to the First Amendment’s protections?'

A quick, and very personally subjective, history of Social Media

It also occurred to me – living in a more nostalgic phase – that about 10+ years back, when each of these unexplored and then unidentified new specifies of technology popped their heads out of the primordial binary goop, crawled onto land and looked for a place to call home, they were in fact considered rebels. These neo-media were a way to circumvent traditional news, marketing, etc. There were no rules and those of us jumping into them were looking for a fresh experience where we explored new horizons, and had voices without massive budgets needed – for the first time in like forever...

And, those voices screamed out into the empty space – with raw, unfiltered diatribes, photo essays, GIF-fery, the triumphant rise of the meme as a form of cultural commentary (and humour), and more.

But, we had to grow and mature. So for the sake of the growing masses venturing into this new frontier, our curators started banning 'obscene' or #fourletter hashtags, removing imagery with nudity, and other content followed.

Today: the struggle between freedom vs. security

Now, we've entered an era where our hyper-awareness of social constructs, prejudices and binary identities has led to a cultural forum where there isn't much that can be said without offending someone, somewhere in some fashion. [As delicately as I've maneuvered around this part of the subject matter - with Night-Fox-like agility I like to think - I will still have pissed off one of you, such is life]. Add to the recipe an egregious misuse of algorithmic power (hashtag #fakenews) and stretch your fingers as far back into our contemporary making as 9/11 and the events that have unfolded since...

It is an unavoidable fact that we are continually asked to make Sofie's Choice between our freedoms and a 'sense' of security. Every time you select more of the latter, you trade in a bit more of the former... and, perhaps deserve neither, to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin. Our founding 'patriarchs' (say what you will of them, but they started this whole dance) saw this as one of the greatest discussions in constructing the foundations of our modern society – looking out with as much foresight as their limited spyglasses could magnify at the time.

So, let's circle back to the topic at hand: Bullying is horrific (having been a victim of it myself, on not one but numerous occasions throughout my life, yet having chosen not to let it define me, only inform me with sympathy for others in similar situations), suicide is no joke and shouldn't be the subject of one, self-harm and all of these related tragedies we hope no one we know encounters.

The question we should be asking is who decides whether or not we have the right to discuss them? Should these massive 'businesses' with their profits and survival (many having launched into public markets) at stake get to filter our information for us? Should this very post be censored if it offends, angers or simply gives you a bit of indigestion? Well, I certainly hope not, and here's why:

Controversy makes us more interesting

I consider myself most thoroughly stretched by the discussions and friendships that I often agree with the least. I have a friend, a film buff, who knows his shizz, and with whom I often fervently disagree with around his take on most movies... even the ones we both come out loving!! But, damn if I don't go to him first for his opinion once we've both been to the theater.

I have another friend with whom I often cannot avoid sharing (no matter how hard we try) the most in-depth – I'm talking to the bottomless bosoms of your soul, dirty floor behind your toilet, skeletons in closet type stuff – conversations/debates (depending on the POV of who's observing). We talk about politics, gender, sexuality, heightism, racism, even digressing into the definition of isms and their proper uses in the discussion. TBH, I often find these discourses simultaneously mentally/emotionally exhausting AND stimulating as I delicately maneuver what I say to both convey my strong opinion while also utilizing word choice that we can both find common ground on and allow him to feel that his stance has also been respected, even if refuted. But I hold him in the highest regard as a friend and compatriot in humanity.

I have a sister, we couldn't be more dissimilar in vocation, approach to culinary choices, lifestyle decisions, dress, where we live, etc, etc, etc. But, who would I rather have in my corner? Who gets me, I mean really gets me, for me? Who when they say something is good for me, I know it's because they know it's good for me and not something they want for me?

These friendships keep me sane and insane, fresh, on fire, furious and yet knowing I'm loved. They keep me 'real', connected, self-aware and veritable.

If we only surround ourselves with those that agree with us, we'll be limp noodles, empty shells, not knowing WHY we believe what we believe because it's NEVER been tested.

Think about your Facebook feed, assuming you still have one or even look at it: it has become increasingly filled with things you like, people you like, topics you like, products you like, because they've crafted an algorithm that serves up to you exactly that, and as you click LIKE and heart, thumbs up, [insert engagement here], they further curate your feed to show you only what you want, what pacifies and appeases your world viewpoint. BORING...

What could it cost us?

As a former journalist, and perpetual knowledge junkie, I find it offensive that any one entity would tell me that I don't need to see or know something. That's my decision to make for myself and my family. It is the bedrock that our system of government was constructed upon, a government that must respect our right to access and express such data, however controversial. Why are we giving that decision-making power away to tech monoliths?

I guess the closing question is, do you want to uphold the right to make whatever meme you've been inspired to birth? However distasteful? Should others?

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts, even if I don't agree with them.

For more slightly controversial thoughts on marketing, media and similar topics, read my blog, or connect on LinkedIn.

#discoursewelcome #discussionsdoorisalwaysopen #pleasetodiscuss #socialmedia #freedomofinformation