By Josh Virany ‘22, News Writer

Are social media companies such as Facebook and Twitter violating an individual’s freedom of speech when they censor content on their platforms? Well, the debate over social media censorship is not all that simple. The Gainesville Times reported, “The increasing publicity afforded major social media platforms’ decisions to remove certain posts, and their rationales for doing so, has led to a cacophony of complaint and criticism, much of which invokes allegations of bias interwoven with shouts of a constitutional guarantee of ‘freedom of speech.’”

The pressing issue of social media censorship is one that is debated across the world. Social media censorship is the suppression of public communication that is deemed to be harmful or untruthful. While some people argue that censorship denies an individual freedom of speech, others argue that censorship is necessary to end the spreading of specific harmful content. Tech giants, such as Facebook and Twitter, have both chosen to censor specific content. On both of their help center websites, they explain their policies regarding censorship. 

In July of 2019, Twitter updated and refined their Hateful Conduct Policy to state six key areas in which they will censor a post. These areas include violent threats, wishing or hoping harm on a person or group of people, references to mass murder or specific means of violence where protected groups have been the primary target or victim, inciting fear about a protected category, content that degrades someone, and hateful imagery. Furthermore, in March of 2020, Twitter updated their Hateful Conduct Policy in a statement that explains,  “We are further expanding this rule to include language that dehumanizes on the basis of age, disability, or disease.” Twitter has constantly been updating their Hateful Conduct Policy in efforts to reduce the risk of offline harm. 

Similar to Twitter, Facebook has been refining its censorship policies over the past few years.. Facebook has a Community Standards website where they detail what types of posts will be censored. Facebook explains that they will censor a post if it contains violence and incitement, supports dangerous individuals or organizations, coordinates harm and crime, attempts to sell a good, or contains fraud and deception. Facebook censorship policies are constantly being updated, though in their most recent update in October of 2020, they released specific guidelines as to what dangerous individuals or organizations they will restrict. In this update, the guiding policy stated, “In an effort to prevent and disrupt real-world harm, we do not allow any organizations or individuals that proclaim a violent mission or are engaged in violence to have a presence on Facebook.” 

Since Twitter and Facebook have released and established concrete censorship policies, the companies have been met with backlash. For example, in October of 2020, an unpublished article written about Hunter Biden, the son of President-elect Joe Biden, had surfaced on Twitter and Facebook. Within several days, both companies censored the article, preventing users from reposting it. Many Republicans were outraged by this, as expressed in Republican Senator Ted Cruz’s statement: “We’ve seen Twitter and Facebook actively interfering in this election in a way that has no precedent in the history of our country.” As a result, Republican officials have been actively attempting to delete Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which makes tech companies not liable for what users post. A hearing regarding the fate of Section 230 has been ongoing since late July and a decision from the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected soon. 

While some people see Facebook’s and Twitter’s censorship policies as an infringement of an individual’s First Amendment right, others see the benefits of these policies. Censorship can prevent the spread of misinformation, especially during a contentious election year. Nina Jankowicz, a disinformation expert, explains, “Nineteen days before voting closes in the 2020 election, I believe we are more vulnerable to online disinformation from both foreign and domestic sources than ever before.”