Recently, there was a poll on Facebook that asked whether the President should be assassinated. The member who made the application is now being hunted by the Secret Service and for good reason. A threat to the President is a serious issue (not to mention illegal) and hopefully that person will be reprimanded. Threats to presidents are nothing new but the fact that this threat was trumpeted through Facebook raises interesting issues.
Facebook removed the poll after receiving reports from members. That was the right decision. Today’s Los Angeles Times editorial raises the fact that the site should not have to pre-screen every poll or quiz or post the millions of members create. This issue is also raised with online newspaper articles with an option to comment. Pre-approval of the comments would take time and possibly chill potential debate. Yet, there are definitely some comments, polls etc. that are not useful to debate and add nothing to a conversation about an issue. The community should take it upon itself to report those instances so that an organization can take the steps to remove it.
If the organization receives numerous requests from members and delays taking down the post or comment, then they should be liable for whatever damage that post or comment may have caused. However, in order to allow the free flow of ideas and debate, they should not be required to pre-screen online forums. This is especially true on forums where debate about politics and the government are thriving.
Of course, that leaves potential victims of comments, polls, posts etc. with little recourse unless the publisher gives up their information (if they even have the information to give).
Today's LA Times editorial also mentions that maybe Facebook should educate more carefully about the information given up when a member participates in a poll or quiz that is not created by Facebook. The company has been attacked over this issue already by Canadian officials. See my post. As a result, the company said it would make an effort to better inform its members. It may be in poor taste and definitely poor judgment to participate in a poll like the one about Obama, but it’s possible a few people took the poll as a joke. Should they be investigated along with the maker of the poll?
Interaction is the most compelling feature of social media. The interaction is easy and fast. While it may allow more people to pitch in their thoughts and ideas, it also allows for a few to abuse the ease and freedom. The best way to handle a completely inappropriate item on a social networking site is to allow for member reporting. Those items that are illegal or uselessly distasteful can be removed from the site as easily as they were posted.
Comments
I don't want to let people see the real me online. I don't always have a good side. And I certainly don't want to see the ugly side that other people have. The problem with AS YOU CALLED 'social interaction' sites is that it becomes a soap box for extreme people to spew out their views. The rules of basic decently have been thrown out the window. There has to be a limits to everything otherwise you have anarchy and chaos. The Obama poll did cross the line.
I agree the Obama poll crossed the line. Great post!
What about the idiots that post things on their profiles that ruin and destroy many lives. Facebook is out of control and this society and people like you are letting it happen.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!