Read WebProNews
With Friends!

Should Social Media Censor Offensive Content?

Is it free speech, and if so, should social networks honor that designation?

Get the WebProNews Newsletter!
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
There are 77 Comments. Add Yours.
  1. Zinox

    I don’t think Twitter should censor any trending topics, If they do then whats the point of tweeting your own opinion?

    However in this post you failed to mention the trending topics #fuckyouwashington and #OpPayPal censored and removed by twitter in the past 4-5 days.

    • Catherine White

      Thank you for your observation, as I feel this trending blog is as guilty as the trending topic it uses to make it’s slippery point.

  2. Roe

    No, no, and NO!!!

    Take the Israeli-Palestine issue for example. A very heated topic, yet I guarantee that if you let any group claim it’s offensive and should be taken down, someone like AIPAC would try to do just that under the pretext that any anti-Israel speech amounts to antisemitism.

    Regardless of how you feel about this issue, look at the precedent this could set for other heated issues.

    Censorship: never a good idea.

  3. Cece

    Censorship is never ok.

    Its all a mess but the hysterical cries for censorship are the worst of it.

  4. Almost anything could be offensive in some way to someone. The solution isn’t to censor anything that might be offensive.

  5. It is certainly difficult to know when to “censor”. Often it is better to combat it through similar free speech then have someone step in (as many in this case did).

    There is a difference between Gov’t censorship and a private business deciding what to keep or remove from their site. Twitter is a private business and certainly has the right to remove what they want.

    Those that started it probably thought they were being funny. But, for those that have experience it, it is no laughing matter. I recently dealt with something similar. My son thought he was being funny with a comment, but it really hit a nerve and I let him know in no uncertain terms. That comment was “censored” in my book, at least in the context of a joke.

    cd :O)

  6. Universal Laws should apply. No racial slurs, no name calling that is derogatory and/or cruel, and respect for everyone needs to be in place. I find people being offended more today than ever. There is a hyper-sensitivity that is pervasive in society today. Just be sure to do unto others as you would have them do to you. A lot of impolite public comments lately on Youtube and facebook so I hide them permanently.:P

  7. William Jones

    The content, while offensive, should not be removed. People have the right to free speech and their own opinions, and the people who do not agree with the message can choose to not view such messages/content, or even to post content that rebuffs the original message.
    As I always say, “There is no accounting for taste, or lack there-of.” Any message you do not like, don’t view. Would you watch a movie or TV show if it is not too your taste?
    Most people who post such are looking for attention, so respond by NOT giving it too them. If they can not get the attention they crave, they will move on.

  8. Ryan Kempf

    I agree people should learn its not a necessary to cuss or anything else to get their point across for those who think cussing is cute well its not in the least

  9. I disagree that it approaches a slippery slope, for one reason. Twitter, Facebook, Google+… these are all corporate properties. Just as I have the right to decide what comments I will allow on my blog, or the NYT has the right to decide what Letter to the Editor it will publish, they have nothing to do with free speech.
    Every American is entitled to say what they want, but not necessarily where they want to say it. Just as my living room or a company’s lobby is not public property, neither is any website.
    That said, Twitter has the right (and some might say, the obligation to protect its site and its users from some material. Racism, abuse, bullying… nobody in his right mind argues those as being an exercise in free speech. Certainly, this episode was less extreme, but again… it’s their property. They must have given a great amount of thought to the implications of censoring the trend – I applaud them for doing the right thing.
    I suspect(hope) the original Tweet was made tongue-in-cheek, and as such wouldn’t warrant any action, IMO. But the comments that surfaced later changed that.

    • I disliked the nonsense censorship of the pre-’60′s, but also the freedom to march and speak in public places of nazis and kkks. It is a slippery slope on both sides, and needs top quality intelligence to decide what is appropriate. Formulas for poisons, bomb making instructions, even when hidden in humor, are not good communications,…. but of course, I’m only kidding.

  10. My opinion on social media censoring content, it should happen to some degree but the controversy will remain as long as there are people alive for obvious reasons. The issue is how to deal with it. Webmasters or owners of a particular URL are held accountable and could lose their place in the web if not managed appropriately. We hear about certain web sites being terminated when this happens, so it is a reality already. Most people have standards that apply to morality and keeping life sacred but what bothers me is when a competitor of a particular product brand can influence a web master, or a social media website, to suspend an account.
    I know I get it. Where something offends or contradicts the mission statement, (ie. me first,) of a particular social media web site, you’re on his/her territory

  11. Angie

    Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to glorify or encourage others to violence, hatred, prejudice or extremism which could potentially result in someone’s injury.

    Social Media is a form of ‘media’ no different to newspapers, television or radio. It is a means of reaching or influencing the opinions of millions of people around the world and in the wrong hands could be used for both good and sinister purposes. It should therefore adhere to the same principles of responsibility and ethics as all other media.

    Freedom of speech means being able to talk about a variety of topics in an open and honest way. It does not mean however that such discussions should be allowed to take place in hateful, derogatory or obscene language or to condone or minimise behaviour that is illegal, violent or can harm others. An honest discussion would be to hear opinions on when it is acceptable for a man to hit a woman – i.e. in self-defence or when attacked etc., or cultural attitudes to this issue. Such a serious discussion would not be demeaning and would allow for different points of view. I am a woman and even though I do not condone domestic violence can agree that there may be circumstances when a man should be allowed to protect himself and am willing to listen to opinions in support of this.

    Taking such a serious topic in jest,as was the case in this particular thread, is trivialising a very serious matter and making a mockery of domestic violence which often results in serious injury, death, acid attacks or all kinds of abuse. The victims who have been maimed or injured in such attacks read such threads too.

    There are people out there stupid enough to think the subject is funny and these kinds of online discussions might incite them to act out what they read or to justify their own violent behaviour, which ultimately results in greater suffering for the victims. Anyone posting on the Internet should be responsible enough to realise that there are many unbalanced people out there. The pen is mightier than the sword and we wouldn’t go go around leaving sharpened swords all over the place for some lunatic to pick up and cause carnage with.

    Freedom of expression/speech does not mean that we have to right to cause moral, emotional or physical harm to others or incite others through our words to deeds which might result in such an outcome. I think our whole civilisation has a warped view of freedom. We should have freedom of speech but no one should be free of responsibility for our words and actions. Censorship is too strong a word. We should have ‘reviewers’ that ask people to tone down their comments.

    • Angie, you are trying to be nice, but the thought police always lose. Regardless of how one exercises responsibility, it is accountability that rules: action > result > reaction. E.g., political speeches. Politicians promise a certain behavior/action > they are elected > we vote them in or out depending on whether we like their lies or deeds or looks. It is not linear logic; it is the emotional logic of being human and acting as we will in reaction to what we see, hear and experience. We can turn off anything we don’t like. If we took control of what we do ourselves, the hateful idiots, racists, evangelists, politicians and other authoritarians would never rise in popularity unless they had something worthwhile to say and then walked their talk. Phonies and fools are always outed. Teach your children well.

    • Angie, I agree with every point you have very eloquently made, but I believe that keyboards are just as dangerous as sharpened swords, in the hands of those amongst us that have too much time on their hands, and like to try to be sensational. I am sure that a proper education could solve many of the problems caused by the few narrow minded bigots to whom freedom of speech is an invitation to inflame and anger. It is not big, and not clever but from an anonymous keyboard, they feel safe. Have a great day, Martin

  12. Where does censorship stop, and common sense take over? I do to a certain extent agree with censorship, especially when I see trending items like “White people stink” this can only incite hatred and prejudice, but it was trending for a very long while, and all concerned thought it funny. What if the said trend was reversed? There would have been an outcry if it was, and white people were saying something equally derogatory about black people. Racism and hate speech cannot be one-sided, and has,along with any other type of cyber-bullying, no place in any public forum, so yes, I believe it should be censored, along with bad spelling and grammar!
    There shouldn’t be any excuse for illiteracy, in this day and age, and it is one of the simplest ways to moderate the low-life comments, as most seem to emanate from people of very low intelligence. Perhaps the Google-God should filter content by spelling mistakes, and poor use of one’s mother tongue!
    Having got that off my chest, I am off to enjoy some succulent bacon, the aroma of which has been wafting into my airspace, and exciting my gastric juices!

    • awww bacon that offends me! HAHAHAHA! No, but really, censoring the idiots who say “white people stink” isn’t a good idea either…some white people do stink, some black people stink…it’s all about personal hygiene…when we all learn to clean ourselves well, there will be no need for censorship!

      p.s. There is no such thing as “reverse racism”…racism is racism! I know you didn’t mention that Martin, but the sub-text was there. :)

      • Good point, Oliver. Intelligent people don’t have to read the exact words, the inference can be enough, I agree. I won’t offend anyone, because the shallow minded would not be bright enough to read between the lines, as you have! Sorry about the bacon, But I defend my right to eat pork, but do not discriminate against those who don’t. Oops, more between lines content for you. Have a great day, and thanks for your answer, Martin.

  13. The exchange of ideas and information requires complete freedom to express ANYTHING. Fascists and the ignorant believe in censorship.

    • I agree that the free exchange of ideas require free speech. I do not think that social networks should act like people’s mothers and protect them from offensive things they may hear. OMG go to any blog or website that posts articles about politics and you will see much worse there than anything you will ever read on Twitter.

      People need to be adults and ignore the stuff they don’t like.

  14. Should Social Media Censor “offensive content”? FUCK NO!!!

  15. If social media site begin to regulate and censor topics they will become irrelevant to our use of them.
    True some people have opinions that I strongly disagree with. Sometimes I disagree so much that I would like those opinions to disappear because I feel that they are harmful. However if I state an opinion that is disagreeable to some I can be censored in the same manner.
    So the real questions become; who decides what is worthy of censorship and why? Who is controlling my personal use of media?
    Social media sites do have the “right” to allow or disallow any content they see fit. If they do start rigid censorship, I think that people will move on to greener pastures.

  16. winnergirl

    Free speech is a constitutional right, not a business right, and companies such as twitter and facebook are free to delete or allow what they want. The control is always in the hands of the customers, if they don’t like the way a business is run they can not do business with that company. Some companies are so big that it is hard to no use or buy their services, so customers have to decide how much they want to do without. The day those 2,500 people who signed the petition delete their accounts instead will be the day you know that company has let things go too far, until then people will keep tweeting away, or people can start their own social networks with the rules they want, like forums do. Me, I don’t like the trash talk, but so long as it doesn’t encourage violence I ignore it, but I hardly use twitter anyway.

    • I guess it comes down to a business decision then. Would a service like Twitter or Facebook lose more members who are outraged by some of the content or who are outraged that they censored it?

  17. Most people abhor violence and illegal acts. These values create the proper censorship for free speech. If free advice is worth exactly what you pay for it, what is free speech worth? Nothing until you no longer have it. Everything works this way. When law violates our principles, and corporate anal-retentive goody two shoes suits legislate outside existing laws, their revenue will drop and those bad laws will be ignored or repealed. It may take some time, but it is simple…and right. The will of the people wins.

  18. LS Giles

    The topic may very well offensive to a great many people. However, did anyone stop to think that all the controversial comments left to the individual may have fueled his own fire of needing/wanting attention. The social networks censoring content would be similar to keeping its subscribers in prison and one wrong post landing the individual in solitary confinement. My vote is to censor yourselves. If you don’t like what you see move on. Don’t keep it going by complaining about it.
    We have all seen/done things in our lives that need to be put aside. My thoughts are that it is our own inner demons that keep the fires burning. If you feel the need to vent about things you see on the net, that is your own personal opinion. Keep it personal. Don’t publish it for the world to see/read. Sooner or later, as did the topic of all this controversy, it will all die down to less than a memory.

  19. I believe their is a place for freedom of speech but this hashtag is far from funny. Now here’s a harsh fact – 63% of all boys, age 11-20, who commit murder kill the man who was abusing their mother. I just hope this joke fades away and those that think it’s funny wake up to the truth of domestic violence.

    David
    Let’s stop the violence against children
    Makers of Memories

  20. The best form of censorship is self control. Everyone has the ability to turn off the offending device be it the television, movies, the news or the internet.

    Where has eveyone’s common sense gone?

  21. Almost anything could be considered offensive to someone out there. Once you start censoring tweets, where would it end? That particular trending topic at first glance seems to be a joke, not that violence is acceptable, but I don’t think having that as a trending topic actually makes someone say “hey, I’m going to go beat my wife”. Just like people are free to be in a relationship with whoever they wish, people need to be free to make jokes as well … if that particular type of humor is not your cup of tea, don’t click on the hashtag and risk being offended. At the very least this controversy helped bring out a discussion about domestic violence … and bringing things out in the open for discussion is what free speech is about.

    • Yeah…not every instance of people taking offense can be remedied by “growing a thicker skin,” but a lot of them can.

  22. Rob

    No censorship. What I find offensive will be different than someone else. I should not be prevented from discussing a topic with other like-minded people regardless of how offensive someone else thinks it is. These days, anything that a particular group doesn’t like is labeled “Hate Speech” and attempts are made to prevent speech. In a free society, this is wrong.

  23. Kurt R Marquardt

    I agree that domestic violence is nothing to joke about but to start censoring posts will lead us down a slippery slope that I for one am not willing to go down. As the saying goes “they came for the Jews but I didn’t care, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Blacks but I didn’t care because I wasn’t black. Then they came for the Poles but I didn’t care because I wasn’t polish. Now they are coming for me and there is no one there for me. Let the people have there say… what’s to say that the Federal Government won’t overstep there bounds and no one will be able to stand up to them because they have complete censorship control… oh wait that is already happening.

  24. What Slippery Slope would that be ?
    Anyone who feels free to write Crap and place it out in public, should be prepared to eat some of it.

    • Neither the world in general nor social media in specific are black and white. It’s mostly shades of gray. At what point does censoring social media cross from blocking rudeness / encouragement of violence to stifling legitimate free speech? Social media played a vital roll in the recent political revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East. From one viewpoint, those words are illegal and dangerous. From another, they are cries for freedom. I’d hate to have to make that call.

  25. Jack

    Websites decide for themselves what is execrable to them. Its called the “terms and conditions” not censorship.

    • Jack

      execrable = acceptable.

  26. Who would judge what is offensive or not? It’s a fine line. Obviously foul language is not acceptable anywhere however certain topics may be offensive to some and not to others. Maybe they should add an extra “I find this offensive” button. If there were more “I find this offensive” than “likes” or “dislikes” then it could be removed.

  27. ABSOLUTELY NOT! First who is the mediator? It’s bad enough the local print media does this. In America newspapers were never held to this standard, but the COWARDS that run these old rags these days seem to censor comments themselves because they are so desperate for revenue, mostly because they SUCK!

    The internet is great because it supports free speech. Here in America Obama and his thugs are trying to pass laws that would make the net less free. That’s what you get with a nanny state government.

    If you find something offensive don’t look at it, don’t listen to it. Leave the rest of us alone. I understand most of this is for the sake of children that’s the parents responsibility. You blanked for them, you babysit them!

    I am for the US Constitution and the 1st Amendment. I will always defend both.

  28. Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
    deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. – Benjamin Franklin

    I stand by this quote!

  29. your website is very good for website pormotion

What do you think? Respond.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>