Governmental Control Over Social Media Platforms: A Discussion

This discussion post examines the contentious issue of governmental control over social media platforms. The author initiates the discussion by arguing in favor of moderate governmental censorship, citing the potential for social media to be used by harmful organizations, particularly those with terrorist motives, to spread negativity and chaos. The author acknowledges the violation of freedom of speech but emphasizes the need for control to protect societal structures and community. The post also responds to an opposing viewpoint, acknowledging the negative aspects of censorship, such as its potential for misuse by governments, as seen in the Brexit election, where censorship suppressed criticism. The author ultimately highlights the violation of free speech and the risks faced by those who criticize the government, concluding that governmental censorship cannot be supported.

Running Head: Governmental CONTROL OVER SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM
Governmental Control over Social Media Platform
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author's Note:

1CONTROL OVER SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM
CONTROL OVER SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM
The use of social media platforms have grown ten-fold in the last decade with the
enhanced reach of the internet involved shows the increase in the application by the younger
generation. Although there is no denying the fact that the social media and its range has
accelerated the speed of the information and data being shared around the globe; the same
media has been seen as the weapon of creating chaos and spreading negativity. There is a
significant debate on the intensity of control which should be in the hands of the government
to control and filter the messages and information being shared.
Democratic activists see this as the violation of the right to the freedom of speech of
the ordinary citizens, but in reality, it is one of the most needed stop the use of the social
media by the harmful organizations such as those with the motive of inducing terrorism
among the people. I can base my proposal in the form of explanation in terms of the rights to
access information or the right to speech (Carlson, 2017). And to some extent, the
government's censorship on it is a violation, but it has become the matter of political risk for
the probability of the use of these platforms by organizations trying to infiltrate the society
and induce in them the feelings and emotions portraying the government in the wrong light. It
also allows them to display themselves and garner sympathy and empathy and resulting in
their advertisement for supporters (Özkaya, 2017). This can result in drastically degrading
state for the nation and can only be kept in control with the help of moderate censoring by the
government to keep track of the scenarios being depicted over the platform and to filter the
truth.
Thus, in conclusion, I opt for the positive aspect of the censorship in social media by
the government for the protection of the societal structure and community.

2CONTROL OVER SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM
References
Carlson, C. (2017). Censoring Hate Speech in US Social Media Content: Understanding the
User's Perspective. Communication Law Review, 17(1), 24-45.
Özkaya, E. (2017). The Use of Social Media for Terrorism. Defence against Terrorism
Review-Centre of Excellence Defence against Terrorism, 9.
Follow-up Response for Second Topic
The post deals in the argument against the censorship authority of the government and
shows how the government can use to further their cause. My post has been in favor of the
censorship since social media platforms have wholly and virtually made the whole world into
one single nation where information liberty is at its peak. Although my stand is still in favor
of measurable control and censorship over the use of these platforms, the post opens another
dimension of argument which cannot be ignored (Marshall, & Drieschova, 2018). The
negative aspect of the censorship is a valid reason for its impact and influences in the recent
event cannot be avoided. The Brexit election in which the immigration policies were used as
the state management plan and was publicized with the help of several media platform and
the use of the same to criticize the process was curbed which resulted in the exit of UK from
EU (Sander, 2016). Later, it was found that people voted for it under the influence of the
several propagandas run online by the government. Even if the result would have been the
same, the censorship was a clear violation of the right to free speech of the citizen and the
threat faced by people who tried to criticize the government is all the more reason why the
censorship by the government cannot be supported.

3CONTROL OVER SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM
References
Marshall, H., & Drieschova, A. (2018). Post-Truth Politics in the UK's Brexit
Referendum'. New Perspectives, 26(3), 1-18.
Sander, P. (2016). Euroscepticism and voting behavior in the Brexit referendum.