Friday, April 30, 2021
Final Presentation- My Relationship With Technology
Monday, April 26, 2021
Diffusion of Innovations
EOTO- The History of Television
Monday, April 19, 2021
Burying Anti-War Opinions
Drones- The History of Unmanned Flying Machines
Tuesday, April 6, 2021
Should Social Media Silence Its Users?
Last month the Texas state senate approved a bill that relates directly to what we’ve been learning about the Six Clauses of the First Amendment and the Eight Values of Free Expression. The Republican senator, Bryan Hughes, who sponsored the legislation, accuses social media companies of silencing free speech in violation of the First Amendment. This new bill would stop giants such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter from blocking, banning, or discriminating against Texas users based upon their viewpoints. It would also require social media companies to publish policies regarding content removal, while creating an appeals process for content that has been taken down. This proposal seems to be in response to Twitter’s deletion of more than 70,000 accounts of conspiracy groups that were connected to the attack on the US Capitol.
Hughes also states that since social media companies are private organizations, they are exempt from first Amendment violations enforced by the government. He believes that liberal Democrats are behind the decision of Facebook and Twitter to remove the conservative opinions of Texans on those platforms. Even Texas governor Greg Abbot supports the bill, stating that social media is leading a “dangerous movement to silence conservative ideas”.
I have mixed feelings about this bill, as I do agree that social media has a generally positive impact on society, promoting Tolerance, Stable Change, and Discovery of Truth. However, even though the First Amendment guarantees many freedoms, it does not protect “fighting words” that I often see on social media, which can agitate dangerous people and disturb the peace.
On the other hand, I know from personal experience the great power that social media companies have
over people’s accounts. For example, my brother’s Twitter account with 35k followers was unexplainably
taken down last year, and there was no way for him to contact Twitter to ask why. Also, a film director I
know had his entire YouTube channel taken down, also without explanation. These two individuals were
extremely frustrated because there was no one to call, email, or even chat with online about the removal,
which had a direct impact on their livelihood. So I do agree with the bill’s language that there should be a
way to appeal directly to social media companies.
This new legislation in Texas sheds a light on what, if any, impact the First Amendment should have on
social media. It opens an important debate about difficulties of online content, what to allow, and where
the limits of free speech should be on these changing and growing platforms of communication.
US Supreme Court- My New Perspective
After watching Parts I and II of the video, I learned several new things about the Supreme Court of the United States. I did not realize that the court has to wait for issues to be brought to them, and they receive thousands of petitions every year but only accept one hundred. I also did not know that anyone can petition the court, from a prisoner to the President of the United States.
The most surprising thing I learned is that there have been just over 100 Supreme Court justices in the country’s history, at the time the video was recorded. I thought it would be many more than that, but justices often hold their position for decades (the average is sixteen years). I thought the most important take away point is that the United States Supreme Court is the most powerful judicial body on Earth.
After listening to the interviews with the justices, the video changed the way I think of the Supreme Court because it made me consider them as individual people instead of unrelatable, unapproachable figureheads. At first some of them admitted that they felt overwhelmed and strange to be a Supreme Court justice. It could take years until they feel comfortable there, and they even sometimes get nervous or frustrated. These interviews were an interesting way to end the video, because while Part I focused on the court’s tremendous power and responsibility as a while, Part II showed that the Supreme Court is made up of men and women who share the same objective to uphold the United States Constitution, even if they disagree on fundamental issues.