Originally written 12/01/21
Social Media is an ever growing industry with never ending possibilities. Just in my lifetime I have seen the growth and inevitable death of social media platforms. We have seen the rise of Facebook and its corporation, now known as Meta, which owns a majority of social media companies such as Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp and Messenger just to name a few. This doesn’t even include the social media platforms abroad and various businesses the company also owns. We have also seen Twitter become the primary source of political news in the United States. Social media has brought us many great things, such as being able to connect with anyone in seconds and see into the daily lives of the people you follow or friend. But as nice as this sounds, typing it out on paper does make it sound a little more creepy than great. Social media has opened doors for people to share ideas and create groups to spread information. Some of these are as simple as appreciation for history or as stark as storming the US capitol in support of a lame duck president. When do we need to cross the line and put our foot down with social media? Who needs to be held responsible for what is posted on these platforms? Just this past week a student in Michigan opened fire on his fellow students, adding to the number of unnecessary and tragic school shootings in the US. The warning signs were there based on his social media activity, posting a picture to Instagram of his fathers semi-automatic pistol that he would use just days later in his horrific act. When does the government need to step in and tell social media companies how to properly regulate what is posted? But is it constitutional if they do? Social media is the essence of our first amendment right but when does it become too dangerous? These are the most complex questions facing us not only as a country, but also as an ever connected world. We the people should be cautious of a government wanting to regulate our speech but when do we need to prioritize our own safety over speech?
The topic of social media regulation is important to me because it is somthing I use everyday for hours on end. I have countless interactions with all kinds of social media apps and outlets. Mostly mindless scrolling to fill the boredom but that isn’t always the case. Just recently a facebook whistleblower came out with statistics showing that instagram negatively affects younger users mental health by upwards of fifteen percent, leading many young users to eating disorders or suicidal thoughts. I can say as a youth that has grown up with social media that it can cause mental health issues. Constant connection leads to constant comparison. Do I look like them? Do I have what they have? Why are they in a happy relationship but I’m not? Why Am I not good enough? These are all questions that run through teenagers and even grown adults that use social media because of this constant connection. We are able to paint the most beautiful picture of ourselves on social media and leave out the bad parts. This leads to a false reality that is harming a lot of people. False realities can also be created by indulging in conspiracy theories that are floated on social media platforms as well. Many people I know fall victim to these false narratives because they surround themselves in content that they believe to be true. As a teenager that went through the public education system I have had my fair share of school violence threats that have been posted through social media. Luckily I had great law enforcement and school staff that took every threat seriously. Police and Staff found the perpetrator of the posts but as we have learned others aren’t as fortunate as I was. As a user I believe that something needs to change about the way social media is being run in its current state but as a constitutional friend I am wary of how it should be done.
As a country the first amendment is (in my opinion) the most important rights we have as US citizens. As it is stated in the constitution, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances.” A mouthful, but ever so straight forward for the government to follow. The text of the first amendment relates directly to social media. Social media is an outlet for American citizens (and any citizen abroad for that matter) to express in words how they are feeling or upload a picture to keep everyone informed. For congress to pass some sort of legislation regarding social media would directly relate to the first amendment. It is a very complex issue that doesn’t have one right answer. Does one go with the strict constructionism approach in fear of big government controlling the people? Or go with the more liberal approach of loose constructionism that the US should evolve and change it’s laws with changing attitudes, technology and education? What is the right approach in this ever growing social media dependent world? There are expectations of the first amendment. It is commonly expected that you do not yell “fire” in a theater, slander someone’s reputation and even words that promote violence or breach peace. The supreme court has laid these out in different cases but this is very little knowledge to the public, as I was unaware of these exceptions myself. These expectations are dependent upon the times but have set precedent for how social media should be handled.
As I touched on above the two main arguments to the passing of legislation regarding social media fall into how you want to interpret the constitution. The strict constructionist will argue that the constitution should be read for its face value and not in between the lines. In this case any law regarding regulating what is being posted or said on social media would be regarded as a violation of citizens first amendment rights. This is true, as being able to freely exercise your right of speech can be extended through many mediums but would the founding fathers wrote the first amendment differently if they were a member of today’s society? A loose constructionist would argue we do not need to take the constitution for its face value, but rather read between the lines and fit it today’s time and circumstances. A loose constructionist might argue that it is necessary to regulate social media because it is a matter of national security and safety. Both of these viewpoints I mentioned are very compelling and present great points. As with any issue presented in US politics, I would say the majority of Americans lean somewhere in the middle on how we should regulate social media. Americans are proud of our freedoms and speech is one of the most highly regarded, next to the right to bear arms (which has many connections to social media). But I believe that Americans are becoming more aware of the dangers that social media has presented but don’t want to leave this issue up to the government. To put it frankly, the American government is made up of people who just don’t understand social media or use it for their own benefit.
In interviews with friends and family I garnered views on the topic of regulation of social media. I asked my interviewees a variety of questions regarding social media that I deemed relevant and not leaning in a left or right manner. I asked questions such as “is social media a national safety concern”, “how does social media affect your mental health”, “Should companies or individuals be held accountable for what is posted?” and the big question, “Is regulating social media constitutional?”. From these questions I received a variety of answers that were both expected but also slightly not what I was expecting. Nearly all people that I polled told me that social media negatively affects their mental health because it conveys the “perfect” image that everyone should strive to have. I was shocked to find that people didn’t find social media to be a national security concern. When polled I received a response that it was more mental health than national safety concern. I know when I think of social media use and national safety the January sixth insurrection comes directly to mind. The use of social media such as Facebook and Twitter allowed for the circulation of conspiracy theories regarding the twenty twenty election and for President Trump to mobilize his followers. Social media has also been utilized by foreign governments to influence elections in the US. The Netflix documentary The Social Delima highlights this issue very well. It goes in great detail on Russia’s use of bots on social media to help President Trump’s twenty sixteen campaign. But alas, I designed my polling to not influence individuals. My answers for if congress should regulate social media received mixed results. Some said yes, regarding what content can be posted on social media while others said it should be a company’s choice. My polling group was composed of mostly college aged individuals so it was not surprising that they didn’t want Congress to regulate social media. Congress is made up of older people that don’t understand social media or how to use it. Polling was a great way to find opinions on this topic, but of course the results should be taken with a grain of salt since I had small turnout and limited audience, like most polling goes.
In conclusion, the topic of social media regulation is complex and hard to answer. To define how to constitutionally regulate social media is something that goes deep into the roots of our country. To be able to express your freedom of speech is a fundamental right as a United States citizen but does that carry over onto the internet? Would the founding fathers have made the first amendment differently if they had the internet? These are questions that we have to ask ourselves. I find that I commonly ask myself this question in regards to the second amendment. In my opinion it is clear that the founding fathers would have written the second amendment differently if they were alive today. When written, the founding fathers had musket type weapons in mind that had a very small margin of lethality. Today’s modern weapons are designed to precisely kill. We as a society have even progressed to create weapons that can destroy entire countries in a matter of seconds with the push of a button. Collectively it is agreed that citizens do not have the right to bear those types of arms. So why is it so hard to decide what can and can not be said on social media platforms? The idea of a government stepping in and telling its citizens what can and cannot be said is scary for most people because it is reminiscent of many totalitarian regimes we see across the world. We don’t want the government to be able to take away our voices because they are the most powerful tool we have. But eventually we have to make a conscious decision on what needs to be done to keep citizens and our democracy safe.
In my opinion, we have to come together as a country and decide what is the best action to do to address social media. We have seen the extreme dangers it has been able to brew in the last four years. In the United States we have been shown that foregin nations are able to influence our elections by not stuffing ballot boxes, but by simply impersonating supporters of a candidate and spreading misinformation. This is a threat to our democracy and safety. We have seen so many posts on social media that were posted moments before tragedy. We as a nation need to come together and hold big tech companies accountable. We can no longer treat the internet like the wild west of free speech. Certain speech isn’t allowed in certain settings and the same should apply to social media. Too often we see people receive a meere slap on the wrist for their online activity because frankly no one has set the rules. We must vote for young people who understand social media and want to make the change that is much needed. We need to outline what can and cannot be posted on social media. We can no longer live in a world where we see all the signs of tragedy and wait too long to act. The question, “Is social media cause for congressional concern?” is complex and has no straightforward answer but there are steps we can take to fix it and not forget the constitution in the process.