I'm feeling rather sordid and sick today as I read about that sordid, disturbing anonymous "poll" on Facebook the other day. It asked a question about our president; I'm not going to repeat it because it is bereft of much common sense, as if common sense can be included in this discussion.
Full disclosure: I'm on FB. Twitter too for that matter, but only because, professionally speaking, I almost have to be. It's sort of social taboo NOT to have a FB page, but I'm beginning to wonder.
For starters, FB execs should be ashamed that any post regarding the well-being of Barack Obama, particularly in this current heated, political climate, managed to make it on the site. Freedom-of-speech my ass! And the fact that FB brass eventually removed the item is no excuse. We're talking about the POTUS. This is serious business, and had it involved George W. Bush, it would have been just as egregious and serious a matter.
This isn't intended to be a bash-FB posting, but given its extraordinary placement in the lexicon and its undeniable presence in the social arena, there has to be some sort of oversight here; I'm not kidding. This is serious business.
Facebook needs to re-think its ethics. It has to root out the lunatics that have suddenly taken to its public apparatus. I'm not suggesting censorship; I am suggesting that there needs to be in place a check-system that prevents ugly "polls" about Barack Obama that littered the site over the weekend.
I acknowledge the rigidity and difficulty of policing a 200 million-plus network of people, most of whom are responsible and are capable of knowing what's right and wrong; we all have political leanings to some degree--its not about that; a healthy political dialogue is fine and FB is a terrific forum, but the Obama item crossed the line 10-fold.
If Facebook is to revel in its hugely popular social gathering place, fine, but with that comes responsibility and accountability. Common sense. One would hope this sort of incident gets to the desk of the FB CEO and its top brass. Immediately.
Follow me on Twitter and listen to me on XTRA Sports Radio AM 860.
hey rich... i agree that the anonymous polls were disgusting, but how can you say "Freedom-of-speech my ass!" and then say "I'm not suggesting censorship; I am suggesting that there needs to be in place a check-system that prevents ugly "polls" about Barack Obama that littered the site over the weekend."
ReplyDeletepreventing the expression of an idea (even a heinous idea) is, by definition, censorship...
FB may decide that, as a commercial venture, they want to control content, and that's certainly within their rights, but as a writer/journalist you know there is no 'bright line' as to what's acceptable and what isn't... we agree that the stoking of animosity and veiled (or overt) threats of violence are reprehensible, but seeking to uncover violence against the POTUS is what the Secret Service and FBI do... it isn't what i want FB or any public or quasi-public forum (especially one that's a commercial venture) to do, and i certainly don't want them to start evaluating content, because while we all agree -now-, sooner or later we won't agree on a topic or posting or poll (whether its violence or abortion or gun control or same sex marriage or the rights of vegetarians to poop in the fields)... and then one of us -will- be crying 'censorship'
Good point; I guess it does sound like a contradiction; you got me and I'm stuck.
ReplyDelete