Online Media Breathes A Collective Sigh Of Relief, Some At Least

Michael Hedges January 11, 2021 - Follow on Twitter

Organisms seek to survive and sustain themselves. Science has studied self-preservation behavior from the cellular level to social groups. It is, as they say, inherent. Art and literature has often illuminated this metaphorical journey. Who can forget the HAL 9000 singing "Daisy, Daisy" in Arthur C. Clark's 2001: A Space Odyssey?

Much of the digital media world began singing a different song this past week. Thousands of rioters inspired by conspiracy theories and hate descended (January 6) on Washington DC, the US capital. Organizers planned and instructed supporters using social media and other digital platforms; some, but not all, from the darkest recesses of the internet.

The date and place were specific as the US Congress would definitively certify the election of the new US president. The intent was disrupting that symbolic action. The outgoing president addressed the crowds beforehand with the oft-repeated litany of nativist grievance, urging them to “walk” to the Capital building and “take back our country.” So, off they went; some carrying signs, flags, guns, knives and spears. Photojournalists were threatened, beaten, cameras destroyed but the scene was duly memoralized.

Twitter chief executive Jack Dorsey, followed by Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, almost immediately announced full suspensions of the Donald Trump accounts. Both cited “incitement to riot.” Instagram, owned by Facebook, was included. Virtually all social media platforms joined in, including Google subsidiary YouTube. Also banned from Twitter were several individuals associated with Donald Trump as well as identified followers of the QAnon conspiracy theories.

There were exceptions. Parler, which has billed itself as a “free speech” platform appealing to the right-wing, resisted as did other platforms lurking in the deep web. Within hours, Google and Apple had removed download access to Parler apps. The fait accompli for Parler came when Amazon Web Services, Amazon’s cloud-computing hosting unit, gave Parler 24 hours to find another hosting service, citing “a real risk to public safety,” reported CNBC (January 9).

The main social media platforms in the US - Facebook, Twitter and YouTube - walked gingerly around content moderation issues. Posts were tagged and flagged, occasionally removed. Hate speech and outright disinformation could be identified and, if sufficiently egregious, removed. Indeed, laws exist in most European countries specifically requiring removal by the platforms.

Political speech - even if inflammatory - is protected, somewhat. Newspapers, obviously, can print whatever their proprietors like. Licensed broadcasters in many countries place limits on political speech. In the US, broadcasters have no such limits. Indeed, political advertising may not be edited or disclaimers added.

For online media in the US content is largely self-regulated. There are few rules. US broadcasting regulator Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has in recent years dabbled with online media regulation. A favorite right-wing target has been Section 230 of the amended Communications Act, which effectively makes online providers immune from legal actions over content. Section 230 is regarded by legal experts as facilitating the growth of online platforms.

The right-wing in the US has sought to remove Section 230 immunities to allow civil lawsuits over such actions as content moderation. The other side - now ascendent - also wants to tweak the law, mostly to strengthen hate speech prohibitions. After the Capital Hill riots and final determination of the election outcome, perhaps, the relieved online providers and social media platforms felt sufficiently comfortable with the prospect of a management change at the FCC to boot the miscreants. Elections have consequences.

See also...

• Hot Topics - Elections and Media

• Hot Topics - Social Media

• Hot Topics - Disinformation