Should social media platforms censor hate speech? | Nadine Strossen | Big Think

THE AWNSER IS NO!

This basic concept is what these "red pilled" Trump supporter don't get.

Its actually terrifying that people are actually cheering censorship. I dont care what your views are. You have the right to express them.

This lady is too old to understand the nature of computing technology. The only thing that can be compared to today’s social media platforms is the printing press. But her principles are solid so her conclusions are solid.

How about no

censorship means all views . Since it is not about ALL views it is merely an extension of hate speech and double standards . My dad spent 3 years in a cuban prison from 1961 till 1965 and died in 1990 at age 59 from the torture he received because he was caught saying Castro was no good .BLM is proof of the dangers that will ensue if we reward people with bad behavior . THere is no more WE the people . The constitution is merely a anal retention bag for the smug child threatening with the race card threats

So much noise and distraction going around on social media... I hope there is a new channel that is safe and not so manipulating..

Social media platforms today are getting worse. And these founders are not doing anything. Hope there would be another platform that can make a difference from others.

That's why I quit FB and Twitter. Really sucks.

Yea well... Fact don't care about your feelings.
Shaprio2024

We should not be afraid of this cause it has happened throughout history?
Are you high right now or are you just withdrawn to your own little world of ideals and dreams? You might wish to add to your skimming of history just how many times this idea was abused, how its nearly EXCLUSIVELY always those in power, who demand their own interests and feelings to be protected via censorship, how it always comes down to a slippery slope of nonstop, more and more draconian suppression of speech, and how it always ends up in violence and upheaval eventually.

What kind of clown goes like "oh we should be completely okay with this cause it has happened in history already". Are you kidding me?
You know you are watching a propaganda piece when its so devoid of any rationality and semblance of logic that you feel dragged in by the vacuum it creates.

people should always speak up no matter what the implications might be.

She just confused platform with publisher...

👍👍 Tough times never last, but tough people do. The best young entrepreneur ever @evenkingsfall (his insta) says you have to THINK BIG to WIN BIG! Always keep that vision! Don't stop the hard work 🔥

Question to those who support censorship: So,, you believe these companies should be allowed to discriminate at will ? That's like saying a restaurant should be able to ban blacks because it's a privately owned restaurant. I completely disagree that social media has the right to discriminate. If they don't like speech,, they should open a different kind of business.

I'm for free speech, but there should be restrictions. Sure, people aren't always going to change their minds about being racist or sexist, but arguments about equality between races and sexes has existed in varying degrees for hundreds if not thousands of years. Even with all that discussion we still have racism and sexism. Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I don't think that's going to go away; however, it is safer for people to participate in social media platforms and other public spaces if they aren't being harassed. Not to mention that ostracization can be a powerful tool for some people. The proponents of unfettered free speech usually believe in "the marketplace of ideas" which is not an accurate theory. It describes what we currently have, but it doesn't work. For those who aren't aware, the theory is that, if all ideas are present, society will eventually choose the good ideas, and that theory places way too much faith in people's ability to think for themselves and examine sources instead of aligning with groups and practicing group think. People deny they do this to the nth degree, but we all do it to some extent because it's uncomfortable to admit even to ourselves when we were wrong about something. We as humans are often horrible judges of what's true. I do agree it's harmful for the government to be the arbiter of what's true because it would be too easy for them to hide truth that makes them look bad, and it would also be easy for them to spread lies about their political opponents; however, truth is immensely important. I know this is another hot button topic, but look at what happens with covid. Regions, countries, or states that lift restrictions experience a surge in cases. This has been documented. In each case, people believed articles or politicians that told them the restrictions weren't necessary, and there were record numbers of deaths and infections as a result. There needs to be somebody, some organization that calls out false news for what it is because lies can be incredibly dangerous.

Free speech is just that. Even the term hate speech is a violation of free speech.

Keke

When we've "grappled" with these questions before, America has consistently come down on the side of free speech. Social media may be a private entity, but so is AT&T. They were not allowed to prevent blacks from communicating, although we all know the Democrats would have done this; if they could.
These companies have just killed a few million people in 2020. They censored the discussion of using ultra safe malaria drugs on Covid19, and we now know that Ivermectin would have saved millions worldwide. Under the guise of misinformation, they have wrongly come down on some of the biggest and most impactful issues of our time. I don't need some skinny jean soy sucking moron preventing my means to communicate and like it or not; they OWN the public square right now.

technically legally there is no suck thing as hate speech there is just free speech PERIOD GOD gives us all emotion bar non

Absolutely not. At that point you can label anything you don't like as hate speech and have it banned.

Slander. Libel. vulgar not free speech. Hate speach is protected speech political speech is protected we have the right to be wrong and obnoxious. People died for your rights whether you want those rights or not.

This is just ridiculous. Hate speech exists on both sides, Left or Right. This is how it always was, is, and will be. Apparently, the big social media companies are all Liberal-Leaning, so they only seem to eliminate ANY form of Conservative speech they find the least bit intimidating. I mean, they're media giants. They can do it and get away with it, and they have for a long time now.

No. Social media marketers and businessmen are in no position to decide what is "moral," or "allowed," for others. They have biases and can be bought/used (e.g. to help regimes spread disinformation and propaganda to influence public opinion and create chaos, cover up concentration camps, lie about new medicines, throttle dissenting voices, ruin businesses, spread division and hatred, and in general, take us to an 80's Robocop dystopia)
Bill Hicks was right x)

There is no way 3rd party interests of any kind would seek to exploit social media as a tool to control the kinds of ideas people have access to.

Why all the dislikes?

The problem is social media companies are having their cakes and eating them, too. Section 230 of CDA needs to be changed to allow social media companies to choose from one of the following:

1. Either they choose to moderate user content, by which they should then be liable for the user content they leave behind.

2. Or they allow all content without moderation (with the exception of clear violations of the law, ie. defamation, threats, etc, only after they're reported to the company and then reported to law enforcement before being the company removes them) and receive a free pass from liability for the user-posted content.

Under 1, the company has "approved" the messages they leave behind and should thus be liable for the messages. Under 2, civil suits would have to be directed to the poster of messages instead of the company. In effect, the company becomes a "common carrier".

Women are getting banned for even TALKING of female reproduction because it is "triggering" to trans people.

Feminists are getting banned for "bullying" open pedophiles - criticizing their ILLEGAL sexual proclovities is seen as attacks on the LGBTQIA+.

The immuno compromised have gotten banned explaining their particular health situation.

The banning has reached absurd proportions (like censorship has ALWAYS done)...

I just want to say what I want, I don't care about some virgin in his mother's basement gets his feelings hurt ffs

Not when they use it as an excuse to censor information that doesn't support the government and bankers narrative, I will take hate speech all day long before I'd allow social media sites to censor a single person.

Make believe world,make believe rules, make believe Censorship! Live in reality!

Karl Marx said a long time ago that " the ruling ideas are the ideas of the ruling class ". There is no evidence that the plundering, exploiting, oppressing American ruling class is above HATE for ITS enemies - which happen to be anybody resisting in thought , word , or deed the misery of 21st century capitalism. Way back in 1965 Black Muslim leader Malcolm X made a connection between racism and capitalism, between racism and imperialism.
Also I would like to decide for myself who is naughty and who is nice on the communicating world of Ideas & Opinions. THINKING people do this every time they enter a public library and CHOOSE what books to read . It might be Marx's Das Kapital or Hitler's " Mein Kampf ". Or JFK's " Profiles in Courage ".

Can a private business platform restrict speech? If yes, can they restrict it based on race? Can a restaurant restrict people from speaking in their restaurant based on race? Where do we draw that line? Seems far fetched, but if you allow the restriction of speech based on what the private business owner defines as hate then you create a loophole for hate itself.

QUESTION IS WHO DEFINES HATE SPEECH? THIS IS ANOTHER STEP TOWARDS SOCIALISM. RESIST SAY WHAT YOU WANT. THE WORST THEY CAN DO IS ARREST YOU. THEN YOU CAN BE THE WORST PRISONER THEY HAVE UNDER LOCK AND KEY. AT LEAST YOU GET A FREE PLACE TO SLEEP AND EAT ON THE GOVERNMENTS DIME THEN. THEY CAN ‘T LOCK UP 360 MILLION PEOPLE.

QUESTION IS WHO DEFINES HATE SPEECH? THIS IS ANOTHER STEP TOWARDS SOCIALISM. RESIST SAY WHAT YOU WANT. THE WORST THEY CAN DO IS ARREST YOU. THEN YOU CAN BE THE WORST PRISONER THEY HAVE UNDER LOCK AND KEY. AT LEAST YOU GET A FREE PLACE TO SLEEP AND EAT ON THE GOVERNMENTS DIME THEN. THEY CAN ‘T LOCK UP 360 MILLION PEOPLE.

Speech has power. But so too does ignorance & stupidity. Often, censors bring their own bias into the act of censorship. Twitter suspended me from posting anything for a while. Apparently, the admins at Twitter lack both a thorough knowledge of the Torah or Five Books of Moses, and they also lack the discernment to know when you're using hyperbole to prove a point. I had written something about the unfeasibility of changing the imperialistic and aggressive Russian mindset. I said that the only way that - this IS HYPOTHETICAL! This is HYPOTHETICAL only. So I am not intending for anyone to do he, including myself. Here's the Tweet:
"The only way to change the aggressive stance of the Russian government is to kill all Russian men & enslave Russian women & children, indoctrinating them in a more peaceful culture." Again, ADMINS! Not meant in any way whasoeversoever to promote violence against Russia or anyone.

i worked in a federal government office. Common sense was not allowed.

My LinkedIn account has been restricted and they asked me affirm that I wouldn’t post the offensive comments again. But I refuged to apologize to LinkedIn, instead I put them on fire for allowing politically and religiously sensitive posts and associated propaganda, misinformation and hatred to be freely circulated.

Freedom of speech for all

i vote allow hate speech.

Read that fucking article. She definitely speaks very paradoxically, offensively, and incorrectly for a full-blown law professor. You’d assume that her diction would be EXTREMELY clear and concise and leave you REFRESHED (more than anything).

She’s tactless. She’s over here acting like inalienable rights don’t exist and the crazy part about it is that it isn’t funny.

Hate Speech is too nebulous a term to be given any legal weight.

If you use Hate Speech, we are gonna put you down baby. Play your words game and victimize yourself, we know you are a hater and your natural place is Jail. You are going to get fired. 500 likes in 3 years... it's obviously white supremacist, racist and hate speechy. Flag it.

Now that Elon Musk owns Twitter I wonder how she feels today...😂😂😂

Most definitely...its uncivilized

censorship is evil.
Even when using it for "good"
the source is disrespect of others and authoritarian attitude.

Censorship by any name
always favors elite criminals.