Algorithm Censorship against Cyber Bullying

Supreme Court Verdict and Class Action

If the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case against social media corporations and the ongoing censorship policies, it will definitely outline the First Amendment Act on what can be defined as obscene content and the limits of free speech. The distinction between genuine protection and selfish interest has been blurred over the years by the social media giants. Their monopoly aspects have ensured that the platforms only share news and content that is convenient for these corporations. However, the Supreme Court will have a hard time distinguishing actual obscene content and free speech.

The Supreme Court will hear the “Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, No. 17-702” case that will focus on whether social media platforms and mainstream media can act on behalf of the state in determining what the general public can consume in terms of content. The First Amendment Act and the Sherman Antitrust Act are clear on the violations of rights by the media corporations. Once the Supreme Court gives its verdict, there could be broader implications than expected. Thus, the verdict of this case could put the big social media corporations through class action lawsuits based on the First Amendment and the Sherman Antitrust Acts.

Conclusion

The social media giants have clearly abused their powers and privileges on censorship stringent measures. Facebook has been particularly notorious for flagging down content without proper examination to determine if it indeed violates its community standard ethics. On the other hand, Twitter has been silently blocking certain political groups from expressing their views to their followers. YouTube and Google have also been taking down content that is clearly not harmful to the general public. What started off as genuine algorithm censorship against cyber bullying and explicit content has turned out to be a manipulation against the online community. The pertinent question remains “why?” Well, for starters, these social media giants have turned the platforms into a business and advertising space, not only for businesses but also political groups. Therefore, they have evolved into biased corporations that protect the interest of those they deem fit. The Rye bill will hopefully bring sanity on social media and the plaintiffs will be compensated heavily for the losses and damages incurred in the course of wrongful censorship and flagging. Otherwise, the giant corporations risk not only a class action suit, but also turning away potential businesses and new subscribers. Thus, the Rye bill must find a balance that will serve justice to both the social media corporations and the plaintiffs.

Cite this page