If Mark Zuckerberg had not founded Facebook, the political situation in the United States and abroad would have been quite different in recent years. Thus, for fifteen years, Facebook, like other social media, has the power to affect and control people’s opinions. What started as an online platform to connect Harvard University students is one of the most influential media tools today that changes political and business worlds because of its exponential growth and wide popularity among 2.45 billion users.
What makes Facebook so powerful? All these users voluntarily provide their data to be available online or for use in Facebook’s algorithms, and these data are utilized for spreading different types of content, including political ones, and for targeted advertising. This aspect makes users vulnerable as their sensitive data cannot be viewed as fully protected. The governmental regulation of social media content is an important step toward creating a safe digital landscape despite opposing views that freedom of speech can be affected in this case.
Facebook and other social networks need to be held accountable for their potential contribution to developing political tensions and conflicts that occurred in social media posts. The most obvious reason is that Facebook today is an easy but powerful medium to spread any opinion or view, including hate messages and provocation under the veil of freedom of speech. First of all, tools for targeting need to be regulated because today any individual can apply Facebook’s advanced algorithms for making sensitive personal data on users’ activities become monetizable information. Nobody is protected.
Political opinion shapers utilizing Facebook not only post their views, but they also have an opportunity to reach any user they want using sensitive data applied to Facebook’s algorithms. The impact can be extremely intense, and social media has become a perfect tool for hyper-targeted propaganda of different ideas. That is why the public should promote the idea of adopting regulations and censorship for Facebook to protect users from the manipulation of information.
Government regulations are needed to defend 2.45 billion users of Facebook, but this means that just a simple rule cannot work in this case. A modern virtual landscape is very complex, and the determination of responsible actors to formulate effective private policies and regulations requires much time. At the current stage, it is possible to state that the solutions can be associated with developing the idea of Facebook’s responsibility for regulating and censoring political content as well as the idea of self-censoring.
Furthermore, Facebook and other social networks as collectors of personal information should also be accountable for using gathered sensitive data, but the current legal framework adopted in the United States can be discussed as not effective enough to control this aspect. However, the idea of self-censoring that can successfully work in this context is based on the view that users making posts should be responsible for the information they spread, and this issue also needs to be regulated. The only problem is that political leaders and other authorities are expected to demonstrate the example of such responsible behavior to make the rule work.
Although the necessity of regulations to control the world of social media is actively discussed in society and proponents have persuasive arguments to promote this initiative, opponents refer to Americans’ right to expressing their ideas freely. In this context, it is important to distinguish between freedom of speech and the expression of a personal view and hate messages or propaganda that affect other people.
How can Facebook users recognize a border, which should not be crossed? A clear definition of free speech is required, and it is the area of the government’s responsibility to provide the public with a distinct notion that can be used to differentiate between appropriate and inappropriate expressions. Thus, the idea of self-censorship in a virtual environment should be supported by this definition of freedom of speech and suitable expressions. Moreover, until users can reject posting inappropriate material referring to hackers’ attacks, the proposed regulations will not work effectively, and this point should also be addressed when revising the related legal framework.
Today, people use Facebook and other social media not only for sharing their views but also for completing a variety of other goals, imposing their opinions on the audience, and influencing their choices. In this context, a user’s choice cannot be viewed as free anymore, and censorship and restrictions are required to protect individuals who are rather vulnerable in a modern virtual environment. The first step is the formulation of the free speech definition, and the second step is the development of effective regulations to make users of Facebook and its executives accountable for the information they share. In this case, it will be possible to protect users from violating their basic rights.