How the stifling of expression on Twitter an attempt by the old guard to hold on power that is gradually slipping out of their hands.
Once upon a time the sole means
of countering biased or mendacious reporting in the news media was to write
letters to the editor. The letters either found a place in the darkest corner of
the newspaper or were disdainfully dismissed to the dust bin, perhaps without
even the basic courtesy of opening the envelope.
This must have made the erstwhile
news media personnel to feel like royalty.
They could say or write whatever
they pleased, as long as it did not upset the powers that be. The consumer had
very little choice, apart from whining about bias among friends or writing
letters.
While the elected official
has to return to the public at regular intervals to seek re-election, the
monarchs of the media had no such compulsions.
The internet served as an
absolute boon in the democratizing of the news space. Like-minded regular
people had a variety of tools to counter bias and exchanging ideas. However,
social media sparked a revolution, as it empowered the citizen to directly counter
what they read or heard in the news media. No longer did just a few people have
a monopoly on what was opined in the news space.
The news media since Post
Nixon era prided itself for being able to destroy and scare Republicans such
that there is either mortified to stand and try their best to placate their
haters for the fear of either being driven out of office or being persona non
grata. But still, there was a pretense of being neutral.
However, while covering
President Trump most of the mainstream media has become so brazen with its
biased coverage that it now functions as a liberal activist group quite often
leading the charge for the Democrats.
President Trump is an anomaly among Republicans, not only is he fearless in pursuing his agenda and
expressing what he stands for but relishes countering those who have been
mendacious about him.
Amazingly, despite the
relentless and baseless media attacks, the President’s job approval numbers
have been rock steady despite the relentless attacks.
One of the main reasons
for this is Trump effective use Twitter as a medium to directly communicate
with the citizen, circumventing the media. In fact, a significant part of the
MAGA movement continues to be on social media, particularly Twitter where
millions of Trump supporters counter the propagators of fake news and blatant
hypocrisy on a daily basis.
The news media has thus
been rendered irrelevant owing to social media and particularly Twitter. It was
obvious that these monarchs in the media and elected officials weren’t going to abdicate
their thrones of power easily. Hence they dismissed social media such as
Twitter as a cesspool of venomous vipers that inexorably spew ‘hate’ and ‘bigotry’.
Which gave them a
legitimate reason to regulate Twitter. The word ‘regulate’ is actually a
euphemism for suppressing content that they do not agree with. Tweets of right-leaning
individuals are either tagged as suppressed. However, tweets calling for
violence against Trump and his supporters, tweets with blatant anti-Semitism
and left-wing conspiracy theories are allowed to remain.
Under Section 230, a law from 1996, provider or user of interactive computer service are not
treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another
information content provider. They also have
immunity from lawsuits if they suppress content that they deem
"objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally
protected".
Trump’s recent executive order
states that this legal protection must not apply if social media edits posts
by adding a warning or a label. It also says "deceptive" blocking,
including removing a post for reasons other than those described in a website's
terms of service, should not be protected.
Hopefully, the executive order is a the first step towards liberating social media such that real freedom of expression
prevails.
But beyond the Twitter
debate, it is amply clear that most liberals seem to have conveniently
forgotten about the principle of freedom of expression owing to their
inconsolable rage against Trump.
So here’s a quick
revision.
Freedom of expression is the most important tenet of a functioning democracy. This includes the right to
opine, to criticize, to offend, to insult, to ridicule, to satirize, to express
hateful and obscene ideas and to ridicule anything under the sun including the
state, religion, public figures, the formidable fourth estate and even
the almighty (if he or she exists).
What is obscene to one may be
artful to another. What is hateful to one may be innocuous or even thought-provoking
to another. What is uncouth to one may be comical to another. What is crude to
one may be riveting to another. A bigot to somebody may be a maverick to
another.
Clearly, every human being has
a unique perspective and it is this healthy exchange and debates about diverse
ideas, not echo chambers, that facilitates progress as we learn to understand
and empathize with the opposing point of view. Also denying an individual his
right to express is denying yourself the right to be exposed to it.
To allow personal
taste of an individual or group to dictate what is permitted in any forum
of ideas. This is the problem with Twitter today when individuals have decided
to play gatekeepers for the content published. This eliminates all objectivity
of the platform.
Why does this all matter so much?
Largely because freedom of expression emanates from freedom of thought and it
is often these thoughts that have led to change in society. Most of the great achievements
through human history would have probably been impossible if someone somewhere,
had not dared to be different and more importantly was allowed to express this
difference of opinion without fear.
It is this solitary contrarian
voice that begins like a flickering flame but with the support it results in
illuminating everybody. If we become a society that sticks
to convention where only one set of ideas are permitted cease to grow,
we cease to function as a democracy
English author Evelyn Beatrice
Hall, not Voltaire famously
said: “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it.” One would hope that ‘liberals’ makes these very profound
words, the fundamental axiom of their being. Alas in today’s time it remains a
pipedream.
Comments
Post a Comment