The case of social media companies’ involvement in terrorist organizations’ activities is complicated by inconsistencies in law and policies concerning social media activity. The USA PATRIOT Act suggests that victims of terrorism may sue for the damages they sustain. On the other hand, the Communications Decency Act (CDA) protects social media companies by stating that they are not responsible for the information published by users. This essay will explore whether social media companies are accountable for the spread of terrorist organizations.
Terrorist organizations in modern society primarily operate through social media and recruit new members through a continuous selection of candidates based on the personal information provided on users’ profile pages. Active selection allows terrorist organizations to search for followers who are prone to radicalism or quickly succumb to other people’s opinions or those who share similar views and values. There possibly would be significantly fewer terrorist organizations and attacks without social media. Thus, social media networks unknowingly provide a platform for terrorist organizations in the form of the population’s personal information database, violating the population’s right to privacy and reducing people’s safety. Providing additional security measures, such as hiding personal information from strangers, would hinder the terrorist organizations’ recruitment process in a significant way.
Furthermore, violations of social media companies’ terms of use policies primarily operate on report systems. However, there is a low chance that potential followers will file a report for the terrorist organization’s page. Through the years, the companies significantly improved the process of filing a report for violation of terms of use policies. However, a regular active search for accounts that mention the theme of terrorism and blocking such accounts would be more helpful. Thus, I do not believe that social media are doing enough to shut off the communication of terrorist groups. Additional safety measures, such as the profile verification process, could be the action that social media companies can take to solve the problem.
Thus, even though social media cannot be held responsible for the content published by social media users, the companies fail to protect the personal information of users and their safety in the online space. Moreover, social media companies primarily make profits from advertisement placement in different areas of their websites and apps, which means that they benefit from publishing all users’ materials, including terrorist organizations. Even though the suggestion that social media companies intentionally finance terrorist organizations is incorrect, terrorist organizations can use social media to publish inks and collect donations for organizations’ activities. Therefore, social media companies indirectly assist terrorist organizations, and the U.S. anti-terrorism laws should take precedence over provisions of the Communications Decency Act.
Exploring the status of the most prominent cases on the issue provides valuable insight into the present state of things concerning the disparity between the Communications Decency Act and the Anti-Terrorism Act. According to Barker, Gonzalez’s claims against Google were barred by the court due to insufficient allegations. Moreover, even though “Google was aware of the role it played in ISIS terrorist activities” and the company profited from advertising revenue, the court recognized the company’s assistance as insufficient (Barker). The lawsuit brought by the Pulse nightclub shooting victims was also dismissed due to a lack of direct connection between social media companies and the shooter.
In conclusion, the essay explored the question of social media companies’ involvement in terrorist organizations’ activities. Social media companies’ insufficient protection of users’ personal information and adherence to terms or services negatively influences the population’s safety by facilitating terrorist organizations’ activities. However, there is no way to prove their guilt due to the lack of direct connection between social media companies and terrorist organizations. In my opinion, social media companies should be held accountable for the insufficient protection of users from terrorist organizations’ influence by introducing more safety measures.
Work Cited
Barker, H. “Twitter, Google, Facebook Mostly Immune to ISIS Attack Lawsuits.” Bloomberg Law, Web.