Following the derogatory use of social media platforms by some users to disseminate unfitting message contents, and the recent trends among social media tech companies to regulate the stream of caustic political and religious content.
The U.S appeal court has weighed the action steps of social media tech companies on a different scale, rejecting the act of censoring users’ views and diverse political perspectives or otherwise.
It was reported that the court disallowed social media firms with more than 50,000 registered users from suspending, banning, and expurgating users who are only expressing their opinions.
The court alleged that some social media firms are slowly on a silent but dangerous movement to shut off divergent conservative ideas and values from users.
However, various tech companies objected to the order, one of such is NetChoice. The tech’s vice president, Carl Szabo, in a statement, expressed his certainty that the court will uphold the First Amendment right of the social media space when the U.S Supreme Court hears the case.
While the case of both matters are obvious as it is important to safeguard the authenticity of posts lurking around the social media space, it is equally important not to sever the divergent opinions delivered from intellectual reasoning and high cerebral capacity, which may be misinterpreted, especially when it does not fit the status quo, censorable but may contain some levels of truth.
Recently, the Florida state court also ruled out the action of social media companies as inconsistent with users’ rights and hence, unconstitutional.
Social media companies refuted that complying with the order would promote abusive views and extreme political and religious broadside and bigotry.
The U.S court condemned the action citing Trump’s Twitter account, which was banned and bans against similar action in the future, but Twitter cited that the action was taken to mitigate the risk of violence incitement by the former president.
The court order forced social media companies to treat all users equally, irrespective of speech content.
In reaction to this, tech companies viewed the order as antithetical to equal treatment policy because tech companies would now have to react similarly to two extreme messages like “God bless America” and “Death to America,” interpreting the court order as unconstitutional, unfair, and unwise.
Please visit us @GoSpeedHub on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter for more information.
Photo by dole777
