3 ms·
Another option is for a government to involve itself indirectly. It could regulate by requiring a social media company meet a vague "community standard." I'm no
by uniqueid 6y ago
Another option is for a government to involve itself indirectly. It could regulate by requiring a social media company meet a vague "community standard." I'm not convinced that would work, but it's less authoritarian than a government dictating a list of acceptable content to private companies.
Then you use some system (tally letters of complaint? votes? random sample of citizens, akin to "jury duty"?) to see if the community itself is satisfied.
- neuronic 6y agoAre you saying that governments should become admins in society-wide forums?
- uniqueid 6y agoI'm saying mc32 listed two possibilities, but there is a third: for government to delegate to the public. The people can decide what standards of moderation they want. That's an in-between approach, as it doesn't involve government officials drawing up a list of acceptable speech. The philosophy is similar to that of a referendum, jury duty, or an election. It's the community who decide if a company is behaving acceptably.