Giving more people a voice, and bringing people together, a voice and inclusion gives power to the powerless and pushes society to get better over time.
Says Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of the "move fast and break things" motto driven internet giant, Facebook.
Certainly, moving fast, webbing billions across the Globe, and breaking things, be it barriers or distance. The giant, undoubtedly, true to its purpose as a means of connection, a primary source of the update, and one's engagement with the community.
As this stage of integration, tips into that of dissemination, all have watched.
Just a couple of years ago, the Cambridge Analytica scandal leads to widespread concern about how users’ personal Facebook data could be misappropriated for wrongful electoral processes. Though Facebook was said to have been conducting an 'audit', looking into breaches on parts of developers, we haven't quite seen any detailed report on the progress of the 'audit'.
Well, not leaving the 'Analytica' alone, when Facebook’s systems were exploited by Russia to interfere in elections, by extremists to live-stream their atrocities, or by armed gangs to carry out attacks on their rivals, shouldn't we ask, What possibly could be done in order to prevent this?
None of the "not-guilty" agreements against this could stand the chance that provocation, inducement are things!
The biggest example in recent times of Facebook leading to large scale damage was in Myanmar. Facebook was becoming a popular site among the locals who used to be the propagandists to propagate hatred towards the Rohingya community. This led to massive outrage on the Rohingya community, displacing them forever. A Notorious Buddhist Monk, 'Ashin Wirsasthu' had used his Facebook page to propagate hatred against the Rohingyas. His page was later taken down by Facebook after the tragedy had been done in Feb 2018.
Even in Sri Lanka, one saw sparks emerging between the Muslims and Buddhists over Facebook posts leading to several riots.
As an advertising business that gathers huge amounts of data about everything, its users do on Facebook shan't we challenge the company about why more can’t be done to prevent people sharing images of child abuse, videos that seek to recruit people into terror organizations, or content that might encourage people to self-harm.
This precisely boils down a to-The line of regulation needs to be boldly drawn - where? By whom? How?
The very giant in technology can't be accused, for one must comprehend Facebook is not a "traditional news media outlet held by its neck for the content it gives out", but more of the sort of telecommunication, where you cannot hold the telecom accountable for disparaging phone calls!
With more than 2.7 billion people regularly using Facebook, making polices on such content is far and away the most difficult issue facing the company.
The basic pitch on Facebook’s regulation is that social media companies should be required to have “systems in place” to deal with harmful content, ensuring the existence of which shall be the job of the Government.
The standard guidelines, AI systems, end-user reports, all seemingly in effect, yet, so-called harmful content across Facebook is an enormous category.
It's clearly not the lack of control, but the very nature of the business, which is to generate engagement. What possibly could generate more engagement than hate, conspiracy, or lies?
Facebook's only defense to the threat of regulation? “Facebook gives everyone a way to use their voice,” then be it a voice to harass, target, or murder based on where one comes from, what one looks like, or what one believes. Does it sound synonymous to, the social network’s sheer size means there will forever be errors, mistakes, and things that it misses?
These issues require a more proactive response from Facebook, and it shouldn’t just be left to them. Governments should establish clear legal liabilities for social media companies to act against harmful and illegal content when it is being curated through their systems, by their own algorithms.
But again, could adhering to the letter of the law, act as a shield from blame when something inevitably goes awry?