For me I would hold the social media companies more to account when it comes to hate speech and harassment online and force social media companies to do more to stop online harassment and hate speech.
For me I would hold the social media companies more to account when it comes to hate speech and harassment online and force social media companies to do more to stop online harassment and hate speech.
You better be ready to own the consequences of that stance, which I assume you’ve been privileged not to need to. You can look up any number of mass shooters or terrorists who only got there due to online radicalization.
Just for the sake of the argument, I’m assuming we (here) actually have a problem with shooters/terrorists (we don’t): So because a fraction of people abuse something makes it valid to punish everyone else too? Is this some “think of the kids!!!”-argument? Surely someone could be radicalized because he COULD. But also there could someone having the opportunity to speak at all. Like a woman in oh-so-many-countries on this stupid planet.
The negative consequences of free speech don’t warrant the necessity of banning it alltogether. And if we do, who sets the rules? Who draws the line? And do you think the same when the line might be drawn before YOUR opinion? How’d you think about that then? Or are YOU privileged enough to not have to worry about it?
I’m going to stop you at we don’t have a problem with terrorists. Shit take, I don’t care to continue.
Who is “we”? Where I live we don’t have such things. At least not in a noteworthy quantity. Not everyone is us-american :)