The Right of Big Tech to Decide
I am currently reading Green Mars. This is the second book in the Mars Trilogy written by Kim Stanley Robinson. The books describe the happenings on Mars in the 21st century as man settles the planet. Of course as more and more people arrive on Mars, and more and more companies also set up shop on the planet, standard human behaviour starts rooting itself on this newly inhabited world. Consequently we have wars and revolution, ecologists vs industrialists, those who want to leave Mars relatively untouched vs. those who are wanting to turn it into another Earth.
During this time, back on Earth, the planet is becoming less and less inhabitable. People look to Mars as an escape from the sad reality on Earth. The United Nations appears to have had increased power however it is being controlled transnational companies. As a result Mars is also now being run not by a UN or a set of countries but more and more it is being run by these transnationals. Anyhow....this is where I am in the book, roughly a third of the way into Green Mars.
The growing importance of corporations in the fictional world of Robinsons' Mars made me think of what is happening back here on Earth, in our reality of January 2021. We recently had an example of corporations doing the job of what has traditionally been the role of government agencies. Censoring information. Censorship is, rightfully, a very touchy subject and one which really needs to be used as sparingly as possible. Words can incite violence and hate and this is where careful thought on when to apply censorship is required. It is also true that regardless of whether certain topics, people or groups are subject to censorship, their words will always find their way out into the public. There is something to be said in ensuring that, in a controlled way, those words are in fact heard. Society can not have their heads buried in the sand and think that these thoughts are not held by anybody on Earth. They must be heard to be combatted and so that we can organize ourselves to combat - mostly through education.
Twitter and Facebook have both suspended Donald J. Trump from their platforms. In addition to that Apple and Google have removed another platform, Parler, from their application stores. Amazon in turn terminated their hosting agreement with Parler. Parler was a platform which many people turned to once they recognized that Twitter and Facebook would no longer let them freely express their opinions.
While I do not agree with Donald J. Trump, the elected officials that blindly follow him nor his blind followers who swallow and follow his toxic words, I also do not agree with silencing them. We need to read, hear and see what these people are saying so that we can not only realize they are out there and planning but also so that we can prepare ourselves for the results. Humanity does not benefit from turning a blind eye. Rather we need to acknowledge their existence and plan accordingly to combat the forces of hate and toxicity in our society.
Corporations of course are allowed to decide how their platforms are to be used. Platforms that are specific to certain topics, much like the old bulletin boards, can restrict the topics to those which are relevant to the topic they are meant to cover. The issue with these large social media platforms and these giants of the software business is that they have become the de facto place where all topics of life in general is discussed. Topics presented on their platforms are not specific but rather all encompassing of what we humans have in our brains. They have become very powerful forces in our society and a place where millions and billions turn to for information. They have also rightly claimed that impartiality is one of their tenets. In conclusion they have gotten to big to make the decision on who can and cannot use their platforms.
Having these powers comes with responsibility, no doubt. However I am not sure that it is the companies themselves that are best positioned to determine who or what is to be censored. Had popular opinion not turned on Donald J. Trump I am not sure that Twitter and Facebook would have decided to suspend his accounts. His tweets were among the most popular on the platforms and definitely attracted and kept users on their platform, increasing revenues. Their business models reward those who get the most views and therefore keep users on the platforms for a longer period all the while being presented adverts. Had popular opinion not turned @realDonaldTrump would not be suspended and he would be generating revenue for Twitter.
I would prefer that the judiciary via its human rights, civil rights, hate and criminal laws continue to weigh the freedom of expression against the potential for breaking these laws. Once a ruling comes down the platforms should quickly take action and suspend or ban the content. They have become too important to the free flow of information to be allowed to decide, based on popular opinion and the breaking news of the day what should and should not be seen.
Comments