1500
rating
2
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#5491
Should Social Media Platforms Be Held Legally Responsible for Misinformation Spread on Their Networks?
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
Mall
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
1432
rating
375
debates
43.07%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Forfeited
Just three more forfeits.
Round 2
The various social media platforms are hence the actors in Modern’s contemporary public sphere and with such an influence comes the urgency of the responsibility.:
Misinformation Epidemic: The inherent algorithms of social media set up the promotion of the contents by the interaction, by the retweet, like and share options and all of these contributes to the spread of fake news.
Profit Over Truth: The above statement is just to show that since users tend to spend more of their time on some particular sites after being misinformed, the platforms get to gain by taking monetary profits out of chaos; they get to make their money by targeting the best advertisements.
Threat to Democracy: Accuracy for truth therefore is the bane of confidence, and the threat is to the very principle of democracy.
Real-World Consequences: The negative impact that has been associated with the use of social media includes; Since most information shared is fake, the lives of people is endangered through fake health information.
Need for Accountability: This needs to spread a sort of legal responsibility on to the platform for the dispersal such content as a means of encouraging preventive action.
Refer: In brief it can be argued that there is a need to sanction the owners of the social media platforms for such misinformation as such duties and responsibility if so important for the general protection of the integrity of the social media as well as democratic and social fabric of any society.
"Should Social Media Platforms Be Held Legally Responsible for Misinformation Spread on Their Networks?"
My stance is contingency which I would believe is opposing to the opposing side .
I believe the opposing side is saying yes flat out absolutely, social media platforms should be held legally responsible.
I didn't see a razor sharp exact wording of this.
But after reviewing the topic, I have to say it depends. That technically is not in agreement with the opposing side and therefore opposes.
"Should Social Media Platforms Be Held Legally Responsible for Misinformation Spread on Their Networks?"
If the owners and or proprietors did the act themselves, yes they're responsible for their own action which so happens to be done on their own platforms using their own power.
That is the exception.
Other than that, my position for users only , social media platforms are not responsible or should not be because the public users are.
Public users are given terms to agree to and the policies are in place to either dissuade or prevent in misinformation and misuse.
For example, YouTube.
From YouTube itself the following:
"How does YouTube address misinformation?
With billions of people visiting us every day - whether they’re looking to be informed, to catch up on the latest news, or to learn more about the topics they care about, we have a responsibility to connect people to high-quality content. So the most important thing we can do is increase the good and decrease the bad. That’s why we address misinformation on our platform based on our “4 Rs" principles: we remove content that violates our policies, reduce recommendations of borderline content, raise up authoritative sources for news and information, and reward trusted creators. "
So YouTube takes the role in removing information users are responsible for and have created .
More from YouTube:
"What type of misinformation does YouTube remove?
As detailed in our Community Guidelines, YouTube does not allow misleading or deceptive content that poses a serious risk of egregious harm. When it comes to misinformation, we need a clear set of facts to base our policies on. For example, for COVID-19 medical misinformation policies, we rely on expert consensus from both international health organizations and local health authorities.
Our policies are developed in partnership with a wide range of external experts as well as YouTube Creators. We enforce our policies consistently using a combination of content reviewers and machine learning to remove content that violates our policies as quickly as possible."
So YouTube doesn't even allow, let alone be responsible for it.
It's like coming into my house smoking or misbehaving. You're responsible for your behaviors and actions as they have consequences which being removed from my house is one.
What does the YouTube policy say regarding responsibility?
This section includes our service commitment to you. It also explains that there are some things we will not be responsible for."
Such as ...
"If you are a parent or legal guardian of a user under the age of 18, by allowing your child to use the Service, you are subject to the terms of this Agreement and responsible for your child’s activity on the Service. "
"Content is the responsibility of the person or entity that provides it to the Service. YouTube is under no obligation to host or serve Content."
Why should this person be responsible?
The person is the content creator responsible for the content not YouTube.
"Your Content and Conduct
Uploading Content
If you have a YouTube channel, you may be able to upload Content to the Service. You may use your Content to promote your business or artistic enterprise. If you choose to upload Content, you must not submit to the Service any Content that does not comply with this Agreement (including the YouTube Community Guidelines) or the law. For example, the Content you submit must not include third-party intellectual property (such as copyrighted material) unless you have permission from that party or are otherwise legally entitled to do so. You are legally responsible for the Content you submit to the Service. "
The user submitting the action is legally responsible. The user takes action that may adhere or violate. This is not an action taken by YouTube which just provides a platform according to the following:
"Welcome to YouTube!
Introduction
Thank you for using the YouTube platform and the products, services and features we make available to you as part of the platform (collectively, the “Service”). "
Thank you for using the YouTube platform and the products, services and features we make available to you as part of the platform (collectively, the “Service”). "
The user is responsible due to the specific exclusive action made on a technicality that would be unique to the specific method or source taken to make the violation or infringement.
In other words the user decided or took the route specifically to the degree of infringement, causing whatever type of penalty based on the discretion of the user whom has taken the original content.
This section applies to users who provide Content to the Service. It defines the scope of the permissions that you grant by uploading your Content, and includes your agreement not to upload anything that infringes on anyone else’s rights. "
This part of the policy is giving a warning from the start that the duty of the user is to be responsible and proactive to avoid this violation .
This agreement establishes where the responsibility is legally and serves as contractual. So topics like what we're having is really no contest of "who should" and "who should not ".
This is because the users already agree to this signing up. If other platforms wish to be as successful as YouTube business wise financially, they'll adopt this epitome as a business model .
"We may use automated systems that analyze your Content to help detect infringement and abuse, such as spam, malware, and illegal content."
YouTube backs up their agreement on this method.
"We respond to notices of alleged copyright infringement according to the process in our YouTube Copyright Center, where you can also find information about how to resolve a copyright strike. YouTube's policies provide for the termination, in appropriate circumstances, of repeat infringers’ access to the Service."
YouTube backs up their agreement on this method.
"The following restrictions apply to your use of the Service. You are not allowed to:
misuse any reporting, flagging, complaint, dispute, or appeals process, including by making groundless, vexatious, or frivolous submissions;"
The misuse of any reporting, the reporting of what?
Well information which is misinformation. This is established in the agreement from the beginning where the responsibility is. The user is presented with this so he or she needs not to argue, nor we.
Round 3
Forfeited
I rest my case.
Round 4
Forfeited
Case closed. Man that was easy.
Who's next?
Seems my intuition was correct.
I'd consider joining this debate, if not for the fact that I'm in the middle of another debate currently and the instigator of this one is a newbie who so far has not proven that they won't simply FF.
I’d say it depends on the level of responsibility, and if minimal due diligence applies.
If someone shits on the ground of my own home, I would demand them to clean up before I do.
Thats a bit extreme.
if u change the voting period i will consider