The social media behemoth managed to reshape the online environment forever. However, as impressive as its achievements are, Facebook has still not found a proper definition for itself. As a consequence, the platform is subject to many controversial disputes. On the one hand, users do not want to depart from their right to privacy. On the other hand, they keep finding Facebook responsible whenever it allows the appearance of violent content. Last week, the vulnerability of the company resurfaced after a Cleveland killer used Facebook Live feature to broadcast his murder.
Mark Zuckerberg Promised to Prevent the Repetition of the Cleveland Killer Case
Social media is all about giving everyone a voice. This direction is an important feature in accomplishing the initial Facebook dream. This is about building a united community across the entire world. However, this includes those who have evil intentions as well. The same would go with censorship. As soon as the public allows a company to limit the rights of free speech, this new liberty could be exploited to the detriment of anyone.
The CEO of the company, Mark Zuckerberg, expressed his distress regarding the violent content on his platform that made an act of murder public.
“Our hearts go out to the family and friends of Robert Godwin Sr. And we have a lot of work, and we will keep doing all we can to prevent tragedies like this from happening.”
Facebook Approached Violent Content from Both Ends, yet Received Criticism in Both Cases
It took Facebook almost two hours to take the video down. To this delay, social media users responded in anger. Some people blamed the company for the promotion of the post. On the other hand, Facebook acted differently towards another violent content published last year. It was a photo of a naked girl during the Vietnam War who was running from a napalm bomb. In this similar case, the company decided to take it down. The move was met with anger once more on behalf of users.
Because of these two similar incidents a major dilemma surfaces. People still don’t know if Facebook should answer for the content that third parties post on its platform or whether it should remain an objective company. However, Facebook has already three ways to deal with suspicious content.
The platform allows users to flag articles and posts, it has a team of editors that evaluate these markings, and it has an army of AI bots that keep an eye on content. However, robots are not capable of discerning context. Thus, the human surveillance remains the optimal solution for violent content. However, as more such incidents are sure to appear again, users may have to choose between preserving their privacy or allowing human monitors to cut off anyone with inappropriate online demeanor.
Image source: 1