Social Media Censorship -Persuasive Essay

The use of social media has increasingly grown in recent years due to globalization. Social media sites have gained a massive following as they are platforms where people can make social networks and create and share content of their choice. Unlike formal communication, there lacks a direct relationship among people who share content on social media as most are not known to each other and they come from different geographical locations. Therefore, the only uniting factor amongst most people on social media is the platform they share alone. Though most people use social media for personal and business interactions, social media has of late been seen as an avenue of crime and spreading of propaganda that has threatened the lives of many people as a result. Terrorist propaganda, spread and uniting of criminal groups and even online thefts have continually been witnessed in the recent past. The basic reason as to why such crimes have been existent on social platforms is because social media is rarely censored and hence criminals find a more accessible path. Censorship of social media is inevitable for the restoration of sobriety and prevention of crimes that could be potentially carried out on the platforms.

One of the primary reasons as to why social media is not censored is because the law guarantees people the freedom of expression. The freedom of expression is a significant principle of human rights that need to be respected by not only individuals but also by governments. The freedom of speech is not a privilege that a government can withdraw from its citizens, but it is rather one that is expected to be always assured to citizens regardless of the prevailing situation in a nation. It covers every form of communication and hence it is the reason that people fear that censorship of social media would be an infringement on the freedom by the government (Power 8). However, censorship of social media would only instill confidence in the people to be more confident that their information is protected and hence it would be a booster to the freedom.

Though the freedom of expression is necessary, it is essential to view it as a guarantee to the spread of necessary information. Freedom of speech just like any other freedom need to be checked and could be limited if it led to the abuse of the rights of others. Power states, “Freedom of expression is therefore not an absolute right as it can be limited when it conflicts with other rights” (Power 13).  The ideal need for the freedom of expression is therefore not to hurt the freedoms of others just like it has been happening in social media. In some instances, the freedom of expression has been used by malicious social media users to steal from their counterparts as it has been casually witnessed. Theft and hoodwinking on social media is also a type of cybercrime which would be easily prevented if social media was censored.

Due to the viability of social media, some malevolent people have made the platforms an avenue to share propaganda against governments and individuals. Just recently, some of the most significant social media sites inclusive of Facebook, YouTube, Spotify alongside others were forced to removed conspiracy materials that were posted on their platforms by a renowned theorist Alex Jones. The materials were conspiracies that were seen to be against the fundamental establishment of democracy (Fukuyama, n.p.). They were propaganda that threatened the very essence of democracy which was by every means wrong. Were it not for the lack of sufficient avenue of investigation, the author of the materials ought to have been prosecuted and sentenced. However, censorship of social media would have ensured proper investigation and prosecution would have been easy thereby warning of future spreading of such propaganda. 

Because social media is not censored, it is a path through which many crimes against humanity are planned and carried out. Some of the most crimes against humanity that are enhanced by social media are gruesome and can only be prevented through censorship. Power highlights some of them to be, “child pornography, incitement to terrorism or murder, national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, violence, and incitement to commit genocide” (Power 12). It is in the heart of every government to protect its citizens against such crimes, but the same has not been the case since social media is not censored. Criminals, therefore, find better paths through social media to plan for such and have time and again conducted such crimes. The world is at the height of intensified terrorism for instance because the terrorist groups even have public social media sites that are not censored where they easily showcase their extremist behaviors and also recruits new members. Therefore, to stop such crimes, there is a need for social media to be censored by competent authorities.

Though it is not generally the role of the government to be a custodian of the moral fabric of the society, certain inherent ethical codes need to be assured in every interaction that happens among people. The reason as to why many governments are yet to censor social media sites in their countries is because they expect everyone who engages in social media to be led by a deep thought of social responsibility. Self-censorship while engaging on social media is a moral expectation from the society (Scott 3). Self-censorship is an act of social responsibility that should guide an individual to act ethically while engaging in a public sphere. However, self-censorship is just a mild expectation that has not been realized effectively. Scott states that self-censorship is still in the infancy stage and thus there is nothing of the sort (Scott 3). There is however need to train people on how to behave ethically even on social media which would consequently increase better relations among people and which would be a step forward towards restoring sobriety on social media.

Conclusively, social media is a social connection that has been in the place for the past few decades and which has helped people to get interconnected in such a large way. Other than the good side of social media, however, it has been continually used as an avenue to spread hate, propaganda, and crime just because it is not censored. Critics of social media censorship fear that it would limit the freedom of expression but to the contrary, it would boost the freedom through sharing of only the right and necessary information, proper investigation in cases of propaganda would also be done if censorship was allowed and social responsibility would be boosted. By censoring social media, spreading of crime would be heavily prevented and eventually, sanity would be restored on social media.

Works Cited

Fukuyama, Francis. “Social Media And Censorship – The American Interest.” The American Interest. N.p., 2018. Web. 11 Jan. 2019.

Power, Jenny. “Social media censorship and the public sphere: testing Habermas’ ideas on the public sphere on social media in China.” (2016).Scott, Jes. How Social Media Users Negotiate Self-Censorship in the Online Public Sphere. Diss. Communication, Art & Technology: School of Communication, 2015.