introduction for a speech about social media

Speech On Social Media- Advantages, Disadvantages and Importance

Table of Contents

Speech On Social Media: In a world where clicks, likes, and shares have become the currency of our social interactions, there’s no denying the pervasive influence of social media. It’s a digital realm that has seamlessly woven itself into the fabric of our lives, altering how we connect, communicate, and consume information. From connecting with long-lost friends to voicing our opinions on global issues, social media has transformed the way we navigate our interconnected world. But what lies beneath the surface of those enticing timelines and trending hashtags?

Fill Out the Form for Expert Academic Guidance!

Please indicate your interest Live Classes Books Test Series Self Learning

Verify OTP Code (required)

I agree to the terms and conditions and privacy policy .

Fill complete details

Target Exam ---

Students often encounter the task of giving speeches on various topics, and social media is a fascinating subject for exploration. In this article, we will embark on a journey to explore the captivating and complex realm of social media. We have provided a few sample speech topics on social media, highlighting its advantages, disadvantages, and the profound impact it has on our lives.

Long and Short Speeches on Social Media in English

Speech on advantages and disadvantages of social media for students – sample 1.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Today, I stand before you to discuss a topic that has become an integral part of our lives – social media. It’s hard to imagine a world without platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok. Social media has transformed the way we connect, communicate, and share information. But, like every coin has two sides, social media has its advantages and disadvantages.

Let’s start with the positive aspects. Here are the pros of social media. Social media bridges geographical gaps, allowing us to connect with friends and family worldwide. It’s a powerful tool for sharing our thoughts, experiences, and achievements. Students benefit from it as a valuable resource for learning and research. Moreover, it’s a platform for raising social awareness, promoting businesses, and even finding job opportunities.

However, we must also acknowledge the downsides. Excessive use of social media can lead to addiction and affect mental health. It’s a breeding ground for cyberbullying, misinformation, and privacy invasion. Moreover, the constant exposure to idealized images and lives can negatively impact self-esteem.

In conclusion, social media is a double-edged sword. It has revolutionized the way we communicate and share, offering numerous advantages. Yet, we must navigate it cautiously, being mindful of its pitfalls. Let’s use it responsibly and harness its potential for good.

Speech on Technology Speech on Internet Essay on Uses of Internet

Speech on Impact of Social Media – Sample 2

Good day, everyone,

The topic I’d like to address today is the impact of social media on our lives. There’s no denying that social media has become an inseparable part of our daily routine. From connecting with friends to keeping up with the latest trends, it’s all at our fingertips.

Let’s dive into the advantages of social media. Social media allows us to stay connected with friends and family, regardless of distance. It’s a treasure trove of information, news, and educational content. For students, it offers a platform to collaborate on projects and access a wealth of knowledge. Businesses utilize it for marketing and customer engagement.

However, there’s another side to the story. Social media can be addictive, leading to time wastage and reduced productivity. Privacy concerns are a pressing issue, with personal information often at risk. Cyberbullying and the spread of fake news are unfortunate consequences of its widespread use.

So, where do we stand? Social media is a tool, and its impact depends on how we use it. It can bring us closer or push us apart. It can educate or misinform. The choice is ours.

In conclusion, social media has its merits and demerits. It’s up to us to harness its advantages while being vigilant about its pitfalls. Let’s use it wisely, striking a balance between the virtual and real worlds.

Thank you for your attention.

Speech on Social Media Topic in English – Sample 3

I’m delighted to address you on a topic that has reshaped our world – social media. In today’s digital age, it’s nearly impossible to escape its influence. So, let’s explore the impact and significance of social media.

To begin with, social media has revolutionized communication. It connects people worldwide, making the world a smaller place. It’s a powerful tool for staying informed about current events and trends. For students, it’s a treasure trove of educational resources. Entrepreneurs and businesses leverage it for promotion and brand building.

Yet, there’s a flip side. The addictive nature of social media can lead to time wastage. Privacy concerns loom large, as our personal information is often shared and exploited. The spread of misinformation and cyberbullying are unfortunate consequences.

So, where do we go from here? It’s crucial to strike a balance. Use social media as a tool for enrichment, connection, and empowerment. But also, be mindful of its addictive nature and potential pitfalls. Let’s make informed choices in our digital journeys.

In conclusion, social media is a force that’s here to stay. It’s up to us to harness its advantages while being vigilant about its drawbacks. Let’s make our online presence a positive and enriching one.

Social media has become an integral part of our daily lives, revolutionizing the way we connect, communicate, and share information. From its myriad benefits to the nuanced drawbacks, understanding the multifaceted role of social platforms is crucial in today’s digital landscape.

Lets see the Advantages, Disadvantages and Importance of Online Networking

1. Global Connectivity and Networking Social media bridges geographical barriers, enabling individuals to connect globally. It facilitates networking opportunities, fostering professional relationships and personal connections.

2. Information Dissemination and Awareness Instantaneous sharing allows for rapid dissemination of information. Be it news, trends, or educational content, social media serves as a powerful tool for spreading awareness and initiating discussions on various topics.

3. Business Growth and Marketing Businesses leverage social platforms to expand their reach, engage with audiences, and market their products/services. Targeted ads and analytics help businesses create effective strategies.

4. Community Building and Support Social media brings people together around common interests, creating spaces for support, self-expression, advice, and finding similar-minded individuals.

Disadvantages

1. Privacy and Security Concerns Privacy breaches and data misuse remain significant concerns. Users often share sensitive information unknowingly, leading to potential security risks and exploitation by third parties.

2. Addiction and Mental Health Impact Excessive usage can lead to addiction and have adverse effects on mental health. Constant exposure to curated, often idealized content can fuel feelings of inadequacy and anxiety.

3. Spread of Misinformation False information can spread rapidly, impacting opinions and beliefs. Misleading content, rumors, and fake news pose a challenge in maintaining an informed society.

4. Online Harassment and Cyberbullying Social media platforms can be breeding grounds for cyberbullying and harassment. Anonymity and easy accessibility empower individuals to engage in harmful behaviors.

1. Communication Evolution Social media has transformed communication by providing instant connectivity across the globe. It has redefined how people interact, share ideas, and collaborate.

2. Information Accessibility It democratizes information, making knowledge accessible to diverse populations regardless of geographic or socioeconomic barriers.

3. Catalyst for Change It serves as a catalyst for societal change by amplifying voices, raising awareness about social issues, and mobilizing movements for positive causes.

4. Business Adaptation For businesses, social media is an indispensable tool, enabling them to adapt to changing consumer behaviors, innovate marketing strategies, and engage with their target audience effectively.

Also Read: Disadvantages of Using Social Media During Online classes

FAQ’s

Why is social media important speech.

A speech on the importance of social media can highlight its role in connecting people, facilitating communication, sharing information, and its impact on various aspects of our lives.

What is social media in easy words?

Social media is websites and applications that enable users to create and share content, connect with others, and participate in online communities by sharing thoughts, pictures, videos, and messages.

What is the importance of social media in students?

Social media offers students platforms for collaboration, learning, networking, and accessing information. It can aid in educational research, career opportunities, and building connections.

Why is social media important?

Social media is important as it helps in staying connected with friends and family, accessing news and information, promoting businesses, fostering communities, and providing a platform for self-expression.

Write a 1-minute speech on social media?

Social media has revolutionized the way we connect and communicate. It bridges distances, opens doors to new opportunities, and allows us to share our stories with the world. From keeping in touch with loved ones to exploring new interests, social media has become an integral part of our lives, shaping how we learn, work, and interact in today's digital age.

Related content

Talk to our academic expert!

Language --- English Hindi Marathi Tamil Telugu Malayalam

Get access to free Mock Test and Master Class

Register to Get Free Mock Test and Study Material

Offer Ends in 5:00

Short Speech on Social Media in English

Respected Principal, teachers, and my dear friends.

Very good morning to all of you. Today I am going to speak on the topic- Social Media.

The reason I chose this topic because of the growing popularity of social media.

As we all know that social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Whatsapp are gaining importance these days as they are connecting people worldwide with just a click of a button.

If we look at the positive impact of social media, there are various advantages. One of the major advantages of social media is that it is full of information and helps in providing education. For example, children approach social media to get information on the desired topic.

It is a great device for education. It has made live education possible. We can attend a lecture happening in some other part of the world by just sitting in front of a screen in our country.

Isn’t it great?

Social media is also very convenient to stay updated about what is happening around us. We don’t need to wait for a newspaper to give us information. There are various news-related applications that can instantly update us about any serious happening around us.

Social media has also created opportunities for people such as to show their talent. It is also great for advertisements. But despite being so many benefits, it has been criticized. It has disadvantages too.

It is also considered as one of the harmful elements of society. The oversharing on social media can be dangerous. It can attack our privacy. Also, overusing leads to spending too much time on social media which can deviate children from their studies. Sometimes fake news is also spread with its help disturbing the people.

In short, social media has its advantages and disadvantages. It is up to us how we use it. Use it wisely!

Table of Contents

Question on Social Media

What is social media.

Social Media is websites or application that allow people to interact with each other. One can share information, photos, videos etc. One can share, like, comment etc on the content shared by others.

What is the importance of social media?

It is a ‘virtual space,’ people ( Social Media Celebs ) share information, follow their idols, do business, etc. Now it also became professions of people like YouTubers, Facebook influencers, etc they became social media influence. Here a new world open to express themself to the world.

Recommended Books

Related posts:.

• English Summary Home
• Of Friendship Essay | Summary by Francis Bacon
• Why is it so hard to write an essay?
• Daddy Poem Summary and Line by Line Explanation by Sylvia Plath in English
• Random Phrase Generator [English]

Harnessing the Influence of Social Media: A Brief Presentation

• Nicholas S.
• 6 minutes read
• Correction policy

In an era defined by connectivity, innovation, and the relentless pursuit of digital advancement, there's a phenomenon that stands at the forefront of this technological revolution - social media. Today, I invite you to embark on a journey exploring the profound impact of social media in just a brief five minutes.

From its role in shaping our personal connections to influencing global conversations, and from redefining marketing strategies to challenging the way we perceive information, social media has become an undeniable force that shapes our world. Join me as we delve into the dynamic landscape of social media, examining both its triumphs and challenges in this ever-evolving digital age.

Speech on Social Media In English || @EssentialEssayWriting (Video)

Why Social Media Matters

Social media matters because it is a powerful tool for communication, connection, and influence in today's digital age. It has revolutionized the way we interact with others, share information, and build communities. With just a few taps on our smartphones, we can reach a global audience and have our voices heard. Social media allows us to stay connected with friends and family, near and far.

We can easily share updates, photos, and videos, bridging the distance between loved ones. It also provides a platform for networking and building professional relationships, opening doors to new opportunities and collaborations.

Beyond personal connections, social media has become a channel for businesses and organizations to reach their target audiences. It enables companies to promote their products and services, engage with customers, and gather valuable feedback. Social media marketing has become an essential part of any successful business strategy.

Moreover, social media has played a significant role in shaping public opinion and driving social change. It has given a voice to marginalized communities, allowing them to raise awareness about important issues and advocate for justice. Social media has the power to bring people together, spark conversations, and create positive change.

Social media matters because it facilitates connection, empowers individuals and businesses, and drives social change. It has become an integral part of our daily lives, influencing how we communicate, interact, and perceive the world. Harnessing the potential of social media can lead to personal growth, professional success, and societal progress.

→   The origins of social media in the late 90s

The Benefits of Social Media

Social media offers numerous benefits, making it an essential tool for anyone giving a 5-minute speech. It allows us to connect with a vast audience, share valuable information, and engage with our listeners in real-time. Social media platforms provide valuable insights into our audience's preferences and interests, enabling us to tailor our speech accordingly.

Furthermore, social media allows us to establish our expertise and credibility by sharing relevant content and engaging in meaningful conversations. It also provides an opportunity for networking and collaboration with other professionals in our field. By utilizing social media effectively, we can maximize the impact of our speech and reach a wider audience.

As Mark Zuckerberg once said, "The biggest risk is not taking any risk... In a world that is changing quickly, the only strategy that is guaranteed to fail is not taking risks".

So, embrace the power of social media and harness its benefits to deliver an impactful and memorable 5-minute speech.

→   Which social media platform is most popular among doctors?

The Dark Side of Social Media

Social media, despite its many benefits, has a dark side that is often overlooked. It can lead to feelings of isolation and loneliness, as individuals become engrossed in their online personas and neglect real-life relationships. Cyberbullying is another issue, with individuals facing harassment and abuse from anonymous users. The constant exposure to carefully curated images and content can lead to feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem.

Privacy is also a concern, as personal information can be easily accessed and exploited. The addictive nature of social media further exacerbates these issues, with individuals spending countless hours scrolling through their feeds. It is crucial to be aware of the negative impacts and take steps to mitigate them. By fostering healthy online habits and promoting digital literacy, we can ensure a safer and more positive social media experience for all.

→   The impact of social media on communication

Practical Tips for Using Social Media

Practical Tips for Using Social Media: In today's digital age, social media has become an integral part of our daily lives. It provides a platform for individuals and businesses alike to connect, engage, and share information. To make the most out of your social media presence, here are some practical tips to consider.

• Define Your Goals: Before diving into social media, identify your objectives. Are you looking to increase brand awareness, drive website traffic, or generate leads? Clear goals will help you develop a focused strategy.
• Know Your Audience: Understand your target audience's demographics, interests, and preferences. Tailor your content to resonate with them, ensuring higher engagement and interaction.
• Consistency is Key: Regularly post fresh and relevant content to maintain a consistent online presence. This will keep your audience engaged and encourage them to follow and interact with your brand.
• Utilize Visual Content: Visuals are a powerful tool to capture attention on social media. Incorporate high-quality images, videos, and infographics to make your posts more visually appealing and shareable.
• Engage with Your Audience: Social media is all about building connections. Respond to comments, messages, and mentions promptly and authentically. Engaging with your audience fosters trust and loyalty.

By implementing these practical tips, you can leverage the power of social media to achieve your desired goals. Stay authentic, creative, and consistent throughout your social media journey.

💡 Tip: Engage with your audience by responding to comments and messages promptly. This shows that you value their feedback and creates a sense of community on your social media platforms.

The Future of Social Media

The future of social media is bright and promising. As technology continues to advance, social media platforms are evolving and adapting to meet the changing needs and preferences of users. We can expect to see more interactive and immersive experiences, such as virtual reality and augmented reality, integrated into social media platforms. These advancements will enhance user engagement and provide unique opportunities for brands and businesses to connect with their target audiences.

In addition, artificial intelligence and machine learning will play a significant role in shaping the future of social media. These technologies will enable platforms to analyze user behavior and preferences, allowing for more personalized and tailored content. This will result in a more relevant and engaging social media experience for users.

Furthermore, the rise of influencer marketing and user-generated content will continue to be a driving force in social media. Brands and businesses are recognizing the power of authentic and relatable content created by real people. This trend will only continue to grow, as consumers value recommendations and opinions from their peers.

The future of social media holds immense potential. With advancements in technology and the changing preferences of users, we can expect to see more interactive, personalized, and engaging experiences on social media platforms. It is an exciting time for brands, businesses, and users alike as we embrace the endless possibilities of social media.

Final thoughts

In conclusion, social media is a double-edged sword. While it offers numerous benefits such as connecting people, spreading awareness, and fostering creativity, it also comes with its fair share of disadvantages. It is up to us to use social media responsibly and mindfully. By following the practical tips mentioned earlier, we can harness the power of social media for our personal and professional growth.

So let's embrace this digital revolution with caution, empathy, and a desire to make a positive impact!

Frequently Asked Questions

How has social media changed the way we communicate.

Social media has revolutionized communication by enabling instant messaging, video calls, and real-time updates, breaking down geographical barriers.

What are the benefits of using social media?

Social media allows us to connect with friends and family, access information, promote businesses, and express ourselves creatively.

What are the disadvantages of social media?

Social media can lead to addiction, cyberbullying, privacy breaches, and the spread of misinformation.

How can I use social media more effectively?

To use social media effectively, set goals, curate your content, engage with your audience, and prioritize quality over quantity.

What does the future hold for social media?

The future of social media is likely to involve more immersive experiences, augmented reality, and increased privacy measures.

Comments (0)

Comments are currently closed. Subscribe to get notified when comments are open.

Sharing this article with your friends also helps us survive and continue. Thanks!

Join now our growing comunity!

Related articles

Why study physics in USA?

How much should I pay for PPC? Tips and Guidelines

Is Semrush worth the money? Correct Typo if Exists

Degree requirements for influencer marketing

The Art of Closing the Sale: Tips and Strategies for Success

Small Influencers Earnings Breakdown: The Truth About Post Rates

Is Object-Oriented Programming Dead? 4 Pillars of OOP

Trendy Deals: Discounts on Black Friday Apparel and Accessories

Exclusive Savings: Premium Black Friday Offers and Bargains

Unlocking the Secrets of Success: Mastering Effective Childcare Communication for Stronger Connections and Happier Children

Decoding Deep Vein Thrombosis: The Silent Threat to Your Circulation

Strategies for Maximizing Online Profits through Ecommerce Price Optimization

Suggestions or feedback?

MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

• Machine learning
• Social justice
• Black holes
• Classes and programs

Departments

• Aeronautics and Astronautics
• Brain and Cognitive Sciences
• Architecture
• Political Science
• Mechanical Engineering

Centers, Labs, & Programs

• Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
• Picower Institute for Learning and Memory
• Lincoln Laboratory
• School of Architecture + Planning
• School of Engineering
• School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
• Sloan School of Management
• School of Science
• MIT Schwarzman College of Computing

Why social media has changed the world — and how to fix it

Press contact :, media download.

*Terms of Use:

Images for download on the MIT News office website are made available to non-commercial entities, press and the general public under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives license . You may not alter the images provided, other than to crop them to size. A credit line must be used when reproducing images; if one is not provided below, credit the images to "MIT."

Previous image Next image

Are you on social media a lot? When is the last time you checked Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram? Last night? Before breakfast? Five minutes ago?

If so, you are not alone — which is the point, of course. Humans are highly social creatures. Our brains have become wired to process social information, and we usually feel better when we are connected. Social media taps into this tendency.

“Human brains have essentially evolved because of sociality more than any other thing,” says Sinan Aral, an MIT professor and expert in information technology and marketing. “When you develop a population-scale technology that delivers social signals to the tune of trillions per day in real-time, the rise of social media isn’t unexpected. It’s like tossing a lit match into a pool of gasoline.”

The numbers make this clear. In 2005, about 7 percent of American adults used social media. But by 2017, 80 percent of American adults used Facebook alone. About 3.5 billion people on the planet, out of 7.7 billion, are active social media participants. Globally, during a typical day, people post 500 million tweets, share over 10 billion pieces of Facebook content, and watch over a billion hours of YouTube video.

As social media platforms have grown, though, the once-prevalent, gauzy utopian vision of online community has disappeared. Along with the benefits of easy connectivity and increased information, social media has also become a vehicle for disinformation and political attacks from beyond sovereign borders.

“Social media disrupts our elections, our economy, and our health,” says Aral, who is the David Austin Professor of Management at the MIT Sloan School of Management.

Now Aral has written a book about it. In “The Hype Machine,” published this month by Currency, a Random House imprint, Aral details why social media platforms have become so successful yet so problematic, and suggests ways to improve them.

As Aral notes, the book covers some of the same territory as “The Social Dilemma,” a documentary that is one of the most popular films on Netflix at the moment. But Aral’s book, as he puts it, "starts where ‘The Social Dilemma’ leaves off and goes one step further to ask: What can we do about it?”

“This machine exists in every facet of our lives,” Aral says. “And the question in the book is, what do we do? How do we achieve the promise of this machine and avoid the peril? We’re at a crossroads. What we do next is essential, so I want to equip people, policymakers, and platforms to help us achieve the good outcomes and avoid the bad outcomes.”

When “engagement” equals anger

“The Hype Machine” draws on Aral’s own research about social networks, as well as other findings, from the cognitive sciences, computer science, business, politics, and more. Researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles, for instance, have found that people obtain bigger hits of dopamine — the chemical in our brains highly bound up with motivation and reward — when their social media posts receive more likes.

At the same time, consider a 2018 MIT study by Soroush Vosoughi, an MIT PhD student and now an assistant professor of computer science at Dartmouth College; Deb Roy, MIT professor of media arts and sciences and executive director of the MIT Media Lab; and Aral, who has been studying social networking for 20 years. The three researchers found that on Twitter, from 2006 to 2017, false news stories were 70 percent more likely to be retweeted than true ones. Why? Most likely because false news has greater novelty value compared to the truth, and provokes stronger reactions — especially disgust and surprise.

In this light, the essential tension surrounding social media companies is that their platforms gain audiences and revenue when posts provoke strong emotional responses, often based on dubious content.

“This is a well-designed, well-thought-out machine that has objectives it maximizes,” Aral says. “The business models that run the social-media industrial complex have a lot to do with the outcomes we’re seeing — it’s an attention economy, and businesses want you engaged. How do they get engagement? Well, they give you little dopamine hits, and … get you riled up. That’s why I call it the hype machine. We know strong emotions get us engaged, so [that favors] anger and salacious content.”

From Russia to marketing

“The Hype Machine” explores both the political implications and business dimensions of social media in depth. Certainly social media is fertile terrain for misinformation campaigns. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Russia spread  false information to at least 126 million people on Facebook and another 20 million people on Insta­gram (which Facebook owns), and was responsible for 10 million tweets. About 44 percent of adult Americans visited a false news source in the final weeks of the campaign.

“I think we need to be a lot more vigilant than we are,” says Aral.

We do not know if Russia’s efforts altered the outcome of the 2016 election, Aral says, though they may have been fairly effective. Curiously, it is not clear if the same is true of most U.S. corporate engagement efforts.

As Aral examines, digital advertising on most big U.S. online platforms is often wildly ineffective, with academic studies showing that the “lift” generated by ad campaigns — the extent to which they affect consumer action — has been overstated by a factor of hundreds, in some cases. Simply counting clicks on ads is not enough. Instead, online engagement tends to be more effective among new consumers, and when it is targeted well; in that sense, there is a parallel between good marketing and guerilla social media campaigns.

“The two questions I get asked the most these days,” Aral says, “are, one, did Russia succeed in intervening in our democracy? And two, how do I measure the ROI [return on investment] from marketing investments? As I was writing this book, I realized the answer to those two questions is the same.”

Ideas for improvement

“The Hype Machine” has received praise from many commentators. Foster Provost, a professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business, says it is a “masterful integration of science, business, law, and policy.” Duncan Watts, a university professor at the University of Pennsylvania, says the book is “essential reading for anyone who wants to understand how we got here and how we can get somewhere better.”

In that vein, “The Hype Machine” has several detailed suggestions for improving social media. Aral favors automated and user-generated labeling of false news, and limiting revenue-collection that is based on false content. He also calls for firms to help scholars better research the issue of election interference.

Aral believes federal privacy measures could be useful, if we learn from the benefits and missteps of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe and a new California law that lets consumers stop some data-sharing and allows people to find out what information companies have stored about them. He does not endorse breaking up Facebook, and suggests instead that the social media economy needs structural reform. He calls for data portability and interoperability, so “consumers would own their identities and could freely switch from one network to another.” Aral believes that without such fundamental changes, new platforms will simply replace the old ones, propelled by the network effects that drive the social-media economy.

“I do not advocate any one silver bullet,” says Aral, who emphasizes that changes in four areas together — money, code, norms, and laws — can alter the trajectory of the social media industry.

But if things continue without change, Aral adds, Facebook and the other social media giants risk substantial civic backlash and user burnout.

“If you get me angry and riled up, I might click more in the short term, but I might also grow really tired and annoyed by how this is making my life miserable, and I might turn you off entirely,” Aral observes. “I mean, that’s why we have a Delete Facebook movement, that’s why we have a Stop Hate for Profit movement. People are pushing back against the short-term vision, and I think we need to embrace this longer-term vision of a healthier communications ecosystem.”

Changing the social media giants can seem like a tall order. Still, Aral says, these firms are not necessarily destined for domination.

“I don’t think this technology or any other technology has some deterministic endpoint,” Aral says. “I want to bring us back to a more practical reality, which is that technology is what we make it, and we are abdicating our responsibility to steer technology toward good and away from bad. That is the path I try to illuminate in this book.”

Share this news article on:

Press mentions.

Prof. Sinan Aral’s new book, “The Hype Machine,” has been selected as one of the best books of the year about AI by Wired . Gilad Edelman notes that Aral’s book is “an engagingly written shortcut to expertise on what the likes of Facebook and Twitter are doing to our brains and our society.”

Prof. Sinan Aral speaks with Danny Crichton of TechCrunch about his new book, “The Hype Machine,” which explores the future of social media. Aral notes that he believes a starting point “for solving the social media crisis is creating competition in the social media economy.” 

New York Times

Prof. Sinan Aral speaks with New York Times editorial board member Greg Bensinger about how social media platforms can reduce the spread of misinformation. “Human-in-the-loop moderation is the right solution,” says Aral. “It’s not a simple silver bullet, but it would give accountability where these companies have in the past blamed software.”

Prof. Sinan Aral speaks with Kara Miller of GBH’s Innovation Hub about his research examining the impact of social media on everything from business re-openings during the Covid-19 pandemic to politics.

Prof. Sinan Aral speaks with NPR’s Michael Martin about his new book, “The Hype Machine,” which explores the benefits and downfalls posed by social media. “I've been researching social media for 20 years. I've seen its evolution and also the techno utopianism and dystopianism,” says Aral. “I thought it was appropriate to have a book that asks, 'what can we do to really fix the social media morass we find ourselves in?'”

Previous item Next item

Related Links

• MIT Sloan School of Management

Related Topics

• Business and management
• Social media
• Books and authors
• Behavioral economics

Related Articles

The catch to putting warning labels on fake news

Our itch to share helps spread Covid-19 misinformation

Better fact-checking for fake news

Study: On Twitter, false news travels faster than true stories

Social networking

More mit news.

Using MRI, engineers have found a way to detect light deep in the brain

Read full story →

From steel engineering to ovarian tumor research

A better way to control shape-shifting soft robots

Professor Emeritus David Lanning, nuclear engineer and key contributor to the MIT Reactor, dies at 96

Discovering community and cultural connections

MIT Supply Chain Management Program earns top honors in three 2024 rankings

• More news on MIT News homepage →

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, USA

• Map (opens in new window)
• Events (opens in new window)
• People (opens in new window)
• Careers (opens in new window)
• Accessibility
• Social Media Hub
• MIT on Facebook
• MIT on YouTube
• MIT on Instagram

• Speech Topics For Kids

Speech on Social Media

Still thinking about what to include in your speech on social media? How to make your speech stand apart from others? This article will help you to give a good speech on social media. Social media is considered to be both a blessing and a curse. Let’s see how social media plays a role in inspiring and motivating people as well as demotivating and distracting people.

Table of Contents

What do you mean by social media, advantages of social media, disadvantages of social media.

• FAQs on Speech on Social Media

We all have heard about the term ‘social media’ and are quite familiar with it, but what does the term mean? Social media is one of the mediums for communication and content development. Social media allows one to share information, opinions, ideas and many other things and also to create one. Now, there are two different views about social media. One group of people think that social media has a bad influence on people, whereas the other thinks that social media has a lot of positive outcomes. A good speech on social media will cover both aspects.

There are those who vouch for social media, these are the reasons why they do so:

• It is through social media that one develops a large audience. If someone is all set to promote their art, business or work, social media turns out to be a tool to reach a large number of people easily.
• Social media has a major role in connecting people. People who live far away from their families and friends who have grown apart with time can get connected to one another. With social media, the distance decreases between people.
• It is through social media that people learn about events/happenings from around the world. Any news travels faster and reaches peoples’ ears within no time.

Apart from acting as a boon, social media has some disadvantages too. Some of them are mentioned below.

• Frequent use of social media has increased the screen time, which in turn, has caused a rise in physical ailments.
• Continuous use of social media can also make people lazy and lethargic.

Frequently Asked Questions on Speech on Social Media

Does social media have both pros and cons.

Yes, just like two faces of a coin, social media too, has both pros and cons.

What are the advantages of social media?

• It is through social media that people learn about events/happenings from around the world. Any news travels faster and reaches peoples’ ears within no time.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

• Share Share

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Speech on Social Media

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Good [morning/afternoon/evening], and thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. We are here to delve into a topic that has become as integral to our daily lives as the air we breathe: social media. In this digital age, social media is not just a tool; it’s a landscape where our identities, communities, and even our realities are constructed, contested, and celebrated.

The Genesis of Social Media

Let’s begin by acknowledging how social media started as a simple platform for connection. A way to bridge the geographical divide, to reconnect with long-lost friends, and to share moments that define the tapestry of our lives. It was a revolution that promised to make the world smaller, more connected, and in many ways, it has.

The Power of Connection

At its best, social media is a powerful tool for good. It has democratized information, giving a voice to the voiceless and shining a light on injustice. It has fueled movements, from the Arab Spring to #MeToo, showing us the power of collective action. It has created communities, allowing people with rare diseases to find support, and enabling marginalized groups to tell their stories.

The Double-Edged Sword

However, like any tool, the impact of social media depends on how we wield it. It can be a double-edged sword. On one hand, it can uplift and unite. On the other, it can divide and disenfranchise. We’ve seen the rise of misinformation, cyberbullying, and the erosion of privacy. The very platforms that connect us can also be platforms where we compare our lives to the highlight reels of others, often feeling inadequate by comparison.

The Challenge of Misinformation

One of the most pressing challenges we face in the age of social media is the spread of misinformation. The speed at which false information can spread is staggering, and its consequences are real. It can undermine public health, influence elections, and incite violence. Combating this requires vigilance, critical thinking, and a commitment from both platforms and users to prioritize truth.

The Responsibility of Users and Platforms

This brings us to the question of responsibility. Social media platforms have a duty to safeguard their spaces, to ensure they are not breeding grounds for hate, falsehood, or harm. But as users, we too have a responsibility. We must be discerning about the information we consume and share. We must strive to build communities that are inclusive and respectful. We must remember that behind every profile is a human being, deserving of dignity and respect.

Looking Forward: The Path Ahead

As we look to the future, the role of social media in our lives will only grow. The question is not whether it will be a part of our future, but how. We stand at a crossroads, with the power to shape this future. We can choose a path that leverages the power of social media for good, one that fosters connection, community, and understanding.

In conclusion, I urge each of you to consider your role in this digital ecosystem. Let us be architects of a digital world that we are proud to be a part of. A world where we lift each other up, rather than tearing each other down. A world where we share not just what is sensational, but what is true, kind, and meaningful.

Let us not forget that social media, at its core, is about us, the users. It reflects our choices, our values, and our humanity. Let’s commit to making those reflections as positive, truthful, and inclusive as possible.

Speech Generator

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

Generate a speech on the importance of teamwork in school projects

Create a speech encouraging students to participate in extracurricular activities.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

9.2 The Attention-Getter: The First Step of an Introduction

Learning objectives.

• Understand the different tools speakers can use to gain their audience’s attention.
• Name some common mistakes speakers make in trying to gain attention.

Stephen Velasco – IMG_1422 – CC BY-NC 2.0.

As you know by now, a good introduction will capture an audience’s attention, while a bad introduction can turn an audience against a speaker. An attention-getter is the device a speaker uses at the beginning of a speech to capture an audience’s interest and make them interested in the speech’s topic. Typically, there are four things to consider in choosing a specific attention-getting device:

• Appropriateness or relevance to audience
• Purpose of speech

First, when selecting an attention-getting device, you want to make sure that the option you choose is actually appropriate and relevant to your specific audience. Different audiences will have different backgrounds and knowledge, so you should use your audience analysis to determine whether specific information you plan on using would be appropriate for a specific audience. For example, if you’re giving a speech on family units to a group of individuals over the age of sixty-five, starting your speech with a reference to the television show Gossip Girl may not be the best idea because the television show may not be relevant to that audience.

Second, you need to consider the basic purpose of your speech. As discussed earlier in this text, there are three basic purposes you can have for giving a speech: to inform, to persuade, and to entertain. When selecting an attention-getter, you want to make sure that you select one that corresponds with your basic purpose. If your goal is to entertain an audience, then starting a speech with a quotation about how many people are dying in Africa each day from malnutrition may not be the best way to get your audience’s attention. Remember, one of the basic goals of an introduction is to prepare your audience for your speech. If your attention-getter differs drastically in tone from the rest of your speech (e.g., dying in Africa when you want your audience to laugh), the disjointedness may cause your audience to become confused or tune you out completely.

Your third basic consideration when picking an attention-getting device is your speech topic. Ideally, your attention-getting device should have a relevant connection to your speech. Imagine if a speaker pulled condoms out of his pocket, yelled “Free sex!” and threw the condoms at the audience in the beginning of a speech about the economy. While this may clearly get the audience’s attention, this isn’t really a good way to prepare an audience for a speech about bull and bear markets. Not every attention-getter is appropriate for a given topic. Instead, a speaker could start this speech by explaining that “according to a 2004 episode of 60 Minutes, adults in the United States spend approximately $10 billion annually on adult entertainment, which is roughly the equivalent to the amounts they spend attending professional sporting events, buying music, or going out to the movies” (Leung, 2004). Notice how effective the shocking statistic is in clearly introducing the monetary value of the adult entertainment industry.

The last consideration when picking an attention-getting device involves the speech occasion. Different occasions will necessitate different tones, or particular styles or manners of speaking. For example, a persuasive speech about death and dying shouldn’t be happy and hilarious. An informative speech on the benefits of laughing shouldn’t be dull, dreary, and depressing. When selecting an attention-getter, you want to make sure that the attention-getter sets the tone for the speech.

Now that we’ve explored the four major considerations you must think of when selecting an attention-getter, let’s look at a range of different attention-getters you may employ. Miller (1946) discovered that speakers tend to use one of eleven attention-getting devices when starting a speech. The rest of this section is going to examine these eleven attention-getting devices.

Reference to Subject

The first attention-getting method to consider is to tell your audience the subject of your speech. This device is probably the most direct, but it may also be the least interesting of the possible attention-getters. Here’s an example:

We are surrounded by statistical information in today’s world, so understanding statistics is becoming paramount to citizenship in the twenty-first century.

This sentence explicitly tells an audience that the speech they are about to hear is about the importance of understanding statistics. While this isn’t the most entertaining or interesting attention-getter, it is very clear and direct.

Dave Dugdale – Attentive Audience – CC BY-SA 2.0.

Reference to Audience

The second attention-getting device to consider is a direct reference to the audience. In this case, the speaker has a clear understanding of the audience and points out that there is something unique about the audience that should make them interested in the speech’s content. Here’s an example:

As human resource professionals, you and I know the importance of talent management. In today’s competitive world, we need to invest in getting and keeping the best talent for our organizations to succeed.

In this example, the speaker reminds the audience of their shared status as human resource professionals and uses the common ground to acknowledge the importance of talent management in human resources.

Another way to capture your listeners’ attention is to use the words of another person that relate directly to your topic. Maybe you’ve found a really great quotation in one of the articles or books you read while researching your speech. If not, you can also use a number of sources that compile useful quotations from noted individuals. Probably the most famous quotation book of all time is Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations ( http://www.bartleby.com/100 ), now in its seventeenth edition. Here are some other websites that contain useful databases of quotations for almost any topic:

• http://www.quotationspage.com
• http://www.bartleby.com/quotations
• http://www.moviequotes.com
• http://www.quotesandsayings.com
• http://www.quoteland.com

Quotations are a great way to start a speech, so let’s look at an example that could be used for a speech on deception:

Oliver Goldsmith, a sixteenth-century writer, poet, and physician, once noted that “the true use of speech is not so much to express our wants as to conceal them.”

Reference to Current Events

Referring to a current news event that relates to your topic is often an effective way to capture attention, as it immediately makes the audience aware of how relevant the topic is in today’s world. For example, consider this attention-getter for a persuasive speech on frivolous lawsuits:

On January 10, 2007, Scott Anthony Gomez Jr. and a fellow inmate escaped from a Pueblo, Colorado, jail. During their escape the duo attempted to rappel from the roof of the jail using a makeshift ladder of bed sheets. During Gomez’s attempt to scale the building, he slipped, fell forty feet, and injured his back. After being quickly apprehended, Gomez filed a lawsuit against the jail for making it too easy for him to escape.

In this case, the speaker is highlighting a news event that illustrates what a frivolous lawsuit is, setting up the speech topic of a need for change in how such lawsuits are handled.

Historical Reference

You may also capture your listeners’ attention by referring to a historical event related to your topic. Obviously, this strategy is closely related to the previous one, except that instead of a recent news event you are reaching further back in history to find a relevant reference. For example, if you are giving a speech on the Iraq War that began in 2003, you could refer back to the Vietnam War as way of making a comparison:

During the 1960s and ’70s, the United States intervened in the civil strife between North and South Vietnam. The result was a long-running war of attrition in which many American lives were lost and the country of Vietnam suffered tremendous damage and destruction. Today, we see a similar war being waged in Iraq. American lives are being lost, and stability has not yet returned to the region.

In this example, the speaker is evoking the audience’s memories of the Vietnam War to raise awareness of similarities to the war in Iraq.

Another device you can use to start a speech is to tell an anecdote related to the speech’s topic. An anecdote is a brief account or story of an interesting or humorous event. Notice the emphasis here is on the word “brief.” A common mistake speakers make when telling an anecdote is to make the anecdote too long. Remember, your entire introduction should only be 10 to 15 percent of your speech, so your attention-getter must be very short.

One type of anecdote is a real story that emphasizes a speech’s basic message. For example, here is an anecdote a speaker could use to begin a speech on how disconnected people are from the real world because of technology:

In July 2009, a high school girl named Alexa Longueira was walking along a main boulevard near her home on Staten Island, New York, typing in a message on her cell phone. Not paying attention to the world around her, she took a step and fell right into an open manhole (Whitney, 2009).

A second type of anecdote is a parable or fable. A parable or fable is an allegorical anecdote designed to teach general life lessons. The most widely known parables for most Americans are those given in the Bible and the best-known fables are Aesop’s Fables ( http://www.aesopfables.com ). For the same speech on how disconnected people are with the real world because of technology, the speaker could have used the Fable of The Boy and the Filberts:

The ancient Greek writer Aesop told a fable about a boy who put his hand into a pitcher of filberts. The boy grabbed as many of the delicious nuts as he possibly could. But when he tried to pull them out, his hand wouldn’t fit through the neck of the pitcher because he was grasping so many filberts. Instead of dropping some of them so that his hand would fit, he burst into tears and cried about his predicament. The moral of the story? “Don’t try to do too much at once” (Aesop, 1881).

After recounting this anecdote, the speaker could easily relate the fable to the notion that the technology in our society leads us to try to do too many things at once.

While parables and fables are short and entertaining, their application to your speech topic should be clear. We’ll talk about this idea in more detail later in this chapter when we discuss how to link your attention-getter explicitly to your topic.

Startling Statement

The eighth device you can use to start a speech is to surprise your audience with startling information about your topic. Often, startling statements come in the form of statistics and strange facts. The goal of a good startling statistic is that it surprises the audience and gets them engaged in your topic. For example, if you’re giving a speech about oil conservation, you could start by saying, “A Boeing 747 airliner holds 57,285 gallons of fuel.” You could start a speech on the psychology of dreams by noting, “The average person has over 1,460 dreams a year.” A strange fact, on the other hand, is a statement that does not involve numbers but is equally surprising to most audiences. For example, you could start a speech on the gambling industry by saying, “There are no clocks in any casinos in Las Vegas.” You could start a speech on the Harlem Globetrotters by saying, “In 2000, Pope John Paul II became the most famous honorary member of the Harlem Globetrotters.” All four of these examples came from a great website for strange facts ( http://www.strangefacts.com ).

Although startling statements are fun, it is important to use them ethically. First, make sure that your startling statement is factual. The Internet is full of startling statements and claims that are simply not factual, so when you find a statement you’d like to use, you have an ethical duty to ascertain its truth before you use it. Second, make sure that your startling statement is relevant to your speech and not just thrown in for shock value. We’ve all heard startling claims made in the media that are clearly made for purposes of shock or fear mongering. As speakers, we have an ethical obligation to avoid playing on people’s emotions in this way.

Another strategy for getting your audience’s attention is to ask them a question. There are two types of questions commonly used as attention-getters: response questions and rhetorical questions. A response question is a question that the audience is expected to answer in some manner. For example, you could ask your audience, “Please raise your hand if you have ever thought about backpacking in Europe” or “Have you ever voted for the Electoral College? If so, stand up.” In both of these cases, the speaker wants her or his audience to respond. A rhetorical question , on the other hand, is a question to which no actual reply is expected. For example, a speaker talking about the importance of HIV testing could start by asking the audience, “I have two questions that I’d like you to think about. How many students on this campus have had sexual intercourse? Of those who have had sex, how many have been tested for HIV?” In this case, the speaker does not expect the audience to give an estimate of the numbers of students that fit into each category but rather to think about the questions as the speech goes on.

Humor is another effective method for gaining an audience’s attention. Humor is an amazing tool when used properly. We cannot begin to explain all the amazing facets of humor within this text, but we can say that humor is a great way of focusing an audience on what you are saying. However, humor is a double-edged sword. If you do not wield the sword carefully, you can turn your audience against you very quickly. When using humor, you really need to know your audience and understand what they will find humorous. One of the biggest mistakes a speaker can make is to use some form of humor that the audience either doesn’t find funny or finds offensive. Think about how incompetent the character of Michael Scott seems on the television program The Office , in large part because of his ineffective use of humor. We always recommend that you test out humor of any kind on a sample of potential audience members prior to actually using it during a speech.

Thinkmedialabs – Audience laughing – CC BY-NC 2.0.

Now that we’ve warned you about the perils of using humor, let’s talk about how to use humor as an attention-getter. Humor can be incorporated into several of the attention-getting devices mentioned. You could use a humorous anecdote, quotation, or current event. As with other attention-getting devices, you need to make sure your humor is relevant to your topic, as one of the biggest mistakes some novices make when using humor is to add humor that really doesn’t support the overall goal of the speech. So when looking for humorous attention-getters you want to make sure that the humor is nonoffensive to your audiences and relevant to your speech. For example, here’s a humorous quotation from Nicolas Chamfort, a French author during the sixteenth century, “The only thing that stops God from sending another flood is that the first one was useless.” While this quotation could be great for some audiences, other audiences may find this humorous quotation offensive (e.g., religious audiences). The Chamfort quotation could be great for a speech on the ills of modern society, but probably not for a speech on the state of modern religious conflict. You want to make sure that the leap from your attention-getter to your topic isn’t too complicated for your audience, or the attention-getter will backfire.

Personal Reference

The tenth device you may consider to start a speech is to refer to a story about yourself that is relevant for your topic. Some of the best speeches are ones that come from personal knowledge and experience. If you are an expert or have firsthand experience related to your topic, sharing this information with the audience is a great way to show that you are credible during your attention-getter. For example, if you had a gastric bypass surgery and you wanted to give an informative speech about the procedure, you could introduce your speech in this way:

In the fall of 2008, I decided that it was time that I took my life into my own hands. After suffering for years with the disease of obesity, I decided to take a leap of faith and get a gastric bypass in an attempt to finally beat the disease.

If you use a personal example, don’t get carried away with the focus on yourself and your own life. Your speech topic is the purpose of the attention-getter, not the other way around. Another pitfall in using a personal example is that it may be too personal for you to maintain your composure. For example, a student once started a speech about her grandmother by stating, “My grandmother died of cancer at 3:30 this morning.” The student then proceeded to cry nonstop for ten minutes. While this is an extreme example, we strongly recommend that you avoid any material that could get you overly choked up while speaking. When speakers have an emotional breakdown during their speech, audience members stop listening to the message and become very uncomfortable.

Reference to Occasion

The last device we mention for starting a speech is to refer directly to the speaking occasion. This attention-getter is only useful if the speech is being delivered for a specific occasion. Many toasts, for example, start with the following statement: “Today we are here to honor X.” In this case, the “X” could be a retirement, a marriage, a graduation, or any number of other special occasions. Because of its specific nature, this attention-getter is the least likely to be used for speeches being delivered for college courses.

Key Takeaways

• In developing the introduction to your speech, begin by deciding upon a statement to capture the audience’s attention.
• Attention-getters can include references to the audience, quotations, references to current events, historical references, anecdotes, startling statements, questions, humor, personal references, and references to the occasion.
• Make a list of the attention-getting devices you might use to give a speech on the importance of recycling. Which do you think would be most effective? Why?
• You’ve been asked to deliver a speech on the use of advertising in children’s media. Out of the list of ten different possible attention-getting devices discussed in the chapter, how could you use four of them to start your speech?

Aesop (1881). Aesop’s fables . New York, NY: Wm. L. Allison. Retrieved from http://www.litscape.com/author/Aesop/The_Boy_and_the_Filberts.html

Leung, R. (2004, September 5). Porn in the U.S.A.: Steve Kroft reports on a $10 billion industry. Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com .

Miller, E. (1946). Speech introductions and conclusions. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 32 , 181–183.

Whitney, L. (2009, July 13). Don’t text while walking? Girl learns the hard way. CNET News Wireless . Retrieved from http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-10285466-94.html

Stand up, Speak out Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

The power of social media

Social media is an undeniable force in today's world. These talks highlight its impact -- from big history-defining moments to the silliness we’ve come to expect.

How social media can make history

What does it mean to be a citizen of the world?

How social networks predict epidemics

Social media and the end of gender

The power and the danger of online crowds

How to make a splash in social media

Inside the Egyptian revolution

Online social change: easy to organize, hard to win

Informative Speech Example: The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health

In an era dominated by digital technology, social media has become an integral part of our daily lives, shaping how we connect, communicate, and interact with the world around us. While social media offers many benefits, such as facilitating communication and fostering community, it also has a profound impact on mental health. In this speech, we will explore the various ways in which social media influences mental well-being and discuss strategies for promoting a healthier relationship with social media.

Introduction

Scrolling through social media feeds has become a routine activity for millions of people worldwide, providing a window into the lives of friends, family, and even strangers. Yet, beneath the surface of curated posts and filtered images lies a complex landscape of emotions and experiences. Social media has the power to uplift, inspire, and connect us, but it also has the potential to fuel feelings of inadequacy, loneliness, and anxiety. As we navigate the digital landscape of social media, it is essential to understand its impact on mental health and take proactive steps to prioritize our well-being.

1. Comparison and Self-Esteem

One of the most significant ways in which social media affects mental health is through the phenomenon of social comparison. Platforms like Instagram and Facebook often present idealized versions of reality, with users sharing carefully curated photos and posts that highlight their best moments and achievements. This can lead to feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem, as individuals compare themselves unfavorably to their peers and celebrities.

Research has shown a strong correlation between social media use and negative body image, particularly among young people. Exposure to unrealistic beauty standards and the pressure to conform to societal norms can contribute to feelings of dissatisfaction and self-doubt. Additionally, the constant cycle of seeking validation through likes and comments can create a dependency on external feedback for self-worth, further exacerbating feelings of insecurity.

2. Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) and Anxiety

Social media’s constant stream of updates and notifications can also fuel a phenomenon known as the fear of missing out (FOMO). The fear of missing out on social events, experiences, or opportunities portrayed on social media can lead to anxiety and stress, as individuals feel pressure to constantly stay connected and engaged.

Moreover, social media has been linked to increased levels of anxiety and depression, particularly among heavy users. The relentless barrage of information and the pressure to maintain a curated online persona can contribute to feelings of overwhelm and burnout. Additionally, cyberbullying and online harassment are prevalent issues on social media platforms, further exacerbating mental health challenges for vulnerable individuals.

3. Sleep Disruption and Digital Detox

Another significant impact of social media on mental health is its effect on sleep patterns. The blue light emitted by screens can interfere with the body’s natural sleep-wake cycle, making it difficult to fall asleep and stay asleep. Furthermore, the constant stimulation provided by social media can keep individuals engaged late into the night, leading to disrupted sleep patterns and daytime fatigue.

To mitigate the negative effects of social media on mental health, it is essential to practice healthy digital habits and incorporate regular digital detoxes into our routines. This may involve setting boundaries around social media usage, such as limiting screen time before bed or designating specific times for checking social media. Engaging in offline activities, such as spending time outdoors, exercising, or connecting with loved ones face-to-face, can also help promote a healthier balance between digital and real-world experiences.

In conclusion, social media has become an integral part of modern life, offering unprecedented opportunities for connection, communication, and self-expression. However, its pervasive influence on mental health cannot be overlooked. From fostering feelings of comparison and insecurity to exacerbating anxiety and sleep disturbances, social media presents a myriad of challenges for mental well-being.

As we navigate the digital landscape of social media, it is crucial to approach it mindfully and consciously. By cultivating awareness of its impact on our mental health and adopting healthy digital habits, we can mitigate the negative effects of social media and create a more balanced and fulfilling relationship with technology. Let us strive to harness the positive potential of social media while prioritizing our mental and emotional well-being in the process.

Needs help with similar assignment?

We are available 24x7 to deliver the best services and assignment ready within 3-4 hours? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

We provide reliable and top-quality writing services with a great balance of affordability and professionalism with all types of academic papers.

Quick Links

• College Admission Essay Writing Services FAQ
• Nursing Case Studies Writing Services
• Buy Custom Research Papers
• Best Nursing Writing Services
• Literary Analysis Essay Writers
• Nursing Paper Writers for Hire
• Professional Paper Writers
• Cheapest Essay Writing Services
• Write My Essay for Me
• The Best Research Paper Writing Services
• Admission Essay Writing Services!
• Shakespeare Essay Writing Services!
• Rewriting Services
• Term Paper Writing Service

Useful Resources

Dissertation Writing Services

Essay Writer For Hire

Free Essay Maker

How to Study

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

Speech on Importance of Social Media

• Updated on  
• Mar 23, 2021

Students are often asked to prepare speeches as part of ASL or Assessment of Speaking and Learning under the evaluation of CBSE. The speech they are asked to prepare can be short or long. Here in this blog, we give you a preview of a speech on importance of social media, so that you can prepare better for your evaluation! 

Must Read: India of My Dreams Speech for ASL

This Blog Includes:

Social media, publications, digital communities, applications, public speaking, art. music, performances, helps us stay in the presence, constructing a modern reality, source to critical thinking, treasure of knowledge, the right to know the truth, media determines our place in the world, promotes massive changes, sample speech (10 minutes).

Good morning respected teachers and my dear friends. Today I am going to present before you a speech on importance of social media. Let us begin with understanding the very basics. We all know that the plural of medium is media, which refers to the contact networks we disseminate. The media is a term that refers to the networks of connections through which we transmit material such as news, music, films, education, advertising communications, and other types of information. These are often included in physical and online journals and magazines, tv, radio, publicity, cellphone, the internet, fax, and billboards. The media explain the various ways we communicate in culture. As all means of communication are used, the media can cover anything from a telephone call to network coverage.

Moving ahead on my speech on importance of social media let us look at the different kinds of social media . 

Traditional radio may no longer be important, but we have discovered a modern counterpart in the form of podcasts, which are on-demand audio content series that you can listen to anytime, whenever, and wherever you choose.

Any multimedia medium that helps users easily build and post content with the public is social media. The word “social media” refers to a multitude of websites and applications. Twitter, for example, focuses on exchanging connections and brief written posts. Others, such as Instagram and TikTok, are designed to make picture and video sharing simpler.

Television, movies, advertising films, advertisements, and video-sharing services are examples of video and film-based content. Visual content is the most relevant medium of the twenty-first century because it is entertaining, emotional, informative, and empathic.

Books, journals, websites, websites, and academic papers are examples of publications. While the importance of printed media has waned over time, they continue to be valuable for transmitting critical government messages.

Email and text applications are examples of conventional mail and modern messaging tools. For casual conversations, messaging apps like Whatsapp, Telegram, or Signal are common, although emails remain the traditional means of communication for formal discussions.

Also Read: Speech Writing

A digital community, also known as an online community or web community, is a group of people who connect mainly over the Internet. Members in a culture typically have a lot of things in common. Many people consider online groups to be their second home, with a “family of unseen relatives.”

The most diverse types of media-based entertainment are digital gaming and immersive worlds. Gaming is at an all-time peak in 2021, and it will continue to climb as technology progresses and increasingly complex and immersive environments become possible. This momentum, according to experts, will propel gaming into becoming a primary marketing outlet for brands and agencies in the next five years and beyond.

The term “applications” refers to all software that people use, like smartphone apps. Apps  are not only a type of media in the same sense as consumer apps and games have always been, but they are rapidly displacing other types of media such as television, books, and music for consumers’ time and energy.

Signs, banners, multimedia ads, t-shirts, and food packaging are examples of graphics that can be called media. Take for example, you’re driving down the highway and come across a billboard promoting a specific brand’s goods. This will finally be used to connect with consumers and share the offer.

For speaking to large crowds of individuals, visual aids such as charts, slides, and video are often used. Public speaking is no longer just about a microphone and a speaker; it now incorporates a vital part known as presentation, which has proven to be a gamechanger.

Must Read: Figures of Speech

Art on show in public places and theatrical shows can also be called media because they express a message. It is now fashionable to use this medium to draw people’s attention to social problems.

The Importance of Social Media in our Life

No speech on importance of social media is complete without giving the reasons for the importance of the same. Let us now look at the several reasons due to which social media is an essential part of our lives. 

Various media keep us informed of what is going on in the country and across the world. This knowledge allows us to stay in contact with reality and consider what is going on around us, as well as what is going on with others. We shape our own opinions about various topics and ideas by evaluating the knowledge we get. Since we stick to those opinions and step on from others, this behavioural practise reinforces our personalities. What counts is that our views and beliefs mature in a peaceful way, with reverence for those who hold differing viewpoints.

The media produces material depending on what they want to say to the viewer or what the audience needs to see. The success of such cultural material, such as a tv programme, is dependent on how long it lasts. That ensures that if a dance talent show is a success and makes a lot of money, it will be followed by a slew of other series. As a result, more people will choose to be a part of these projects, and they will serve as an inspiration to those who want to be famous. In this way, a new fact has emerged: participating in a televised talent contest is the fastest way to instant celebrity.

Must Read: ASL Topics

It would be unfair if I did not include that the media is a critical thinking source in my speech on importance of social media. The media plays a vital role in education because it helps adolescents and youth improve critical thinking skills. Tv and the internet provide us with a multitude of choices from which to choose. It’s worth noting that communication methods tend to set borrowed habits. They persuade each person to choose one choice over another. That is why teachers and parents need to help children and teens develop a positive personality. This allows them to make decisions based on their own beliefs.

The media, with its immense influence, takes knowledge to a wide range of topics. This helps to introduce children and teens to a variety of learning sources and to pique their interest in what they want to read. Teachers should advise students on how to correctly interpret the sources from which they receive results. This would allow them to distinguish between the types of data they collect, which may be fine, normal, or bad. Bear in mind that whatever piques a child’s attention today might become a source of career motivation in the future. Analyze the origins from which they collect results.

Democracy is, by far, the most equitable form of government currently in use. It enables voters to elect their rulers and then exert power over their acts as elected officials. In this phase, the media plays a vital role. Journalists must try to convey the facts of leaders’ lives and present them as they are. Any person should judge lawmakers in this way. Each person will vote for the person that he or she believes is the most trustworthy and competent, based on their standards. Unfortunately, different interests will emerge during this period, preventing us from seeing the politician for who he or she is. According to their convenience, the media can exploit a politician’s portrait.Therefore, each citizen must strengthen his or her own criteria so that he or she can make better choices.

The media has a huge impact on culture. They keep the public informed on what is going on. It pervades people’s lives by instilling in them their own set of criteria and viewpoints. The media drives the masses in this direction, resulting in numerous social revolutions. Each part of society, in essence, forecasts the possible changes that will occur. The media plays a critical role in highlighting various social issues, allowing for the development of various remedies, as well as reacting to those who fail to perform their duties. Authorities in various areas of government are therefore judged based on their results.

Without question, the media is there with the public during all of the shifts that exist. People’s ways of getting information have evolved, with some favouring some newspapers and some ignoring them. The popularisation of the use of social media is one of the most significant developments that has occurred in the media. People, among other things, engage with other people, form views, and generate patterns.

The media is an integral part of our lives and has a major impact on our culture. Because of the high level of accessibility that occurs around the world, the relevance of media is increasing by the day. As a result, it is critical that each of us become mindful of the media’s influence. With this, I come to the end of my speech on importance of social media. Thank you! 

Explore: How to Write a Speech on Discipline?

This was our blog on speech on importance of social media. We hope it helps you prepare for any future speeches you have to present. For more such interesting blogs, keep following us at Leverage Edu . You can also follow us on Facebook , Instagram and LinkedIn . 

Team Leverage Edu

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Thanks for reading. You can also check: Speech on Indian Culture Speech on Child Labour Speech on Right to Education

Leaving already?

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

📕 Studying HQ

Persuasive speech topics about social media, bob cardens.

• September 10, 2022
• Essay Topics and Ideas

In recent years, social media has become an increasingly popular topic of conversation. Whether you love it or hate it, there’s no denying that social media has a big impact on our lives. In this article, we’ll take a look at some persuasive speech topics about social media so that you can get some ideas for your own speeches.

What You'll Learn

The following is a list of fifty persuasive speech topics about social media. This list is not exhaustive but it will give you a good idea of the range of topics that you could choose from:

• The impact of social media on society
• The advantages and disadvantages of social media
• The implications of social media for businesses
• The use of social media in marketing
• The benefits and drawbacks of using social media for communication
• The role of social media in education
• The potential of social media for political engagement
• The use of social media in the news industry
• The impact of social media on our personal relationships
• How social media is changing the way we interact with each other
• Is social media making us more or less socially connected?
• How does social media affect our mental health?
• Can we trust the information we find on social media?
• Should there be limits on what we can post on social media?
• Is social media creating a generation of narcissists?
• Do we need to be worried about the amount of time we spend on social media?
• Is social media desensitising us to violence and suffering?
• Should we be worried about the amount of personal information we share on social media?
• Is social media making us less able to concentrate and pay attention?
• How is social media affecting the way we think and process information?
• Is social media creating a generation of shallow thinkers?
• How does social media affect our memory and recall?
• Is social media making it harder for us to empathise with others?
• Should parents be concerned about what their children are doing on social media?
• What are the dangers of cyberbullying on social media?
• What are the risks of sharing too much information on social media?
• How can we protect our privacy on social media?
• Can social media be addictive?
• What are the consequences of spending too much time on social media?
• Should employers be allowed to access employee’s social media accounts?
• Can employers discriminate against employees based on their social media activity?
• What are the implications of social media for employees’ rights to privacy?
• Should schools be monitoring students’ social media accounts?
• Can social media be used to cheat in exams?
• What are the academic benefits of using social media?
• What are the risks of using social media in academic research?
• Should universities be using social media to recruit students?
• How can we use social media to create a more inclusive society?
• What are the implications of social media for democracy?
• Can social media be used to combat racism and sexism?
• How does social media affect our ability to have meaningful conversations?
• What are the dangers of echo chambers on social media?
• How can we use social media to promote open and honest dialogue?
• Is it possible to have a healthy relationship with social media?
• What are the benefits of taking a break from social media?
• How can we make sure that we are using social media in a positive way?
• What are the risks of using social media while driving?
• What are the risks of using social media while walking or cycling?
• How can we make sure that we are not addicted to social media?
• How can we use social media in a way that is beneficial to our mental health?

You can also check out :

How Many Sentences Are in a Paragraph

Creative Narrative Essay Topics

Creative Synthesis Essay Topics

1 Step on how to write an introduction for an argumentative essay

Find out more  Capstone Project Ideas for Nursing Leadership [50 Topics]

check out  130+ Good nursing capstone project ideas to Write About )

As you continue,  thestudycorp.com  has the top and most qualified writers to help with any of your assignments. All you need to do is  place an order

Start by filling this short order form order.studyinghq.com

And then follow the progressive flow. 

Having an issue, chat with us here

Cathy, CS. 

New Concept ? Let a subject expert write your paper for You​

Have a subject expert write for you now, have a subject expert finish your paper for you, edit my paper for me, have an expert write your dissertation's chapter, popular topics.

Business StudyingHq Essay Topics and Ideas How to Guides Samples

• Nursing Solutions
• Study Guides
• Free College Essay Examples
• Privacy Policy
• Writing Service 
• Discounts / Offers 

Study Hub: 

• Studying Blog
• Topic Ideas 
• How to Guides
• Business Studying 
• Nursing Studying 
• Literature and English Studying

Writing Tools  

• Citation Generator
• Topic Generator
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Conclusion Maker
• Research Title Generator
• Thesis Statement Generator
• Summarizing Tool
• Terms and Conditions
• Confidentiality Policy
• Cookies Policy
• Refund and Revision Policy

Our samples and other types of content are meant for research and reference purposes only. We are strongly against plagiarism and academic dishonesty. 

Contact Us:

📧 [email protected]

📞 +15512677917

2012-2024 © studyinghq.com. All rights reserved

Improve your practice.

Enhance your soft skills with a range of award-winning courses.

Persuasive Speech Outline, with Examples

March 17, 2021 - Gini Beqiri

A persuasive speech is a speech that is given with the intention of convincing the audience to believe or do something. This could be virtually anything – voting, organ donation, recycling, and so on.

A successful persuasive speech effectively convinces the audience to your point of view, providing you come across as trustworthy and knowledgeable about the topic you’re discussing.

So, how do you start convincing a group of strangers to share your opinion? And how do you connect with them enough to earn their trust?

Topics for your persuasive speech

We’ve made a list of persuasive speech topics you could use next time you’re asked to give one. The topics are thought-provoking and things which many people have an opinion on.

When using any of our persuasive speech ideas, make sure you have a solid knowledge about the topic you’re speaking about – and make sure you discuss counter arguments too.

Here are a few ideas to get you started:

• All school children should wear a uniform
• Facebook is making people more socially anxious
• It should be illegal to drive over the age of 80
• Lying isn’t always wrong
• The case for organ donation

Read our full list of  75 persuasive speech topics and ideas .

Preparation: Consider your audience

As with any speech, preparation is crucial. Before you put pen to paper, think about what you want to achieve with your speech. This will help organise your thoughts as you realistically can only cover 2-4 main points before your  audience get bored .

It’s also useful to think about who your audience are at this point. If they are unlikely to know much about your topic then you’ll need to factor in context of your topic when planning the structure and length of your speech. You should also consider their:

• Cultural or religious backgrounds
• Shared concerns, attitudes and problems
• Shared interests, beliefs and hopes
• Baseline attitude – are they hostile, neutral, or open to change?

The factors above will all determine the approach you take to writing your speech. For example, if your topic is about childhood obesity, you could begin with a story about your own children or a shared concern every parent has. This would suit an audience who are more likely to be parents than young professionals who have only just left college.

Remember the 3 main approaches to persuade others

There are three main approaches used to persuade others:

The ethos approach appeals to the audience’s ethics and morals, such as what is the ‘right thing’ to do for humanity, saving the environment, etc.

Pathos persuasion is when you appeal to the audience’s emotions, such as when you  tell a story  that makes them the main character in a difficult situation.

The logos approach to giving a persuasive speech is when you appeal to the audience’s logic – ie. your speech is essentially more driven by facts and logic. The benefit of this technique is that your point of view becomes virtually indisputable because you make the audience feel that only your view is the logical one.

• Ethos, Pathos, Logos: 3 Pillars of Public Speaking and Persuasion

Ideas for your persuasive speech outline

1. structure of your persuasive speech.

The opening and closing of speech are the most important. Consider these carefully when thinking about your persuasive speech outline. A  strong opening  ensures you have the audience’s attention from the start and gives them a positive first impression of you.

You’ll want to  start with a strong opening  such as an attention grabbing statement, statistic of fact. These are usually dramatic or shocking, such as:

Sadly, in the next 18 minutes when I do our chat, four Americans that are alive will be dead from the food that they eat – Jamie Oliver

Another good way of starting a persuasive speech is to include your audience in the picture you’re trying to paint. By making them part of the story, you’re embedding an emotional connection between them and your speech.

You could do this in a more toned-down way by talking about something you know that your audience has in common with you. It’s also helpful at this point to include your credentials in a persuasive speech to gain your audience’s trust.

Obama would spend hours with his team working on the opening and closing statements of his speech.

2. Stating your argument

You should  pick between 2 and 4 themes  to discuss during your speech so that you have enough time to explain your viewpoint and convince your audience to the same way of thinking.

It’s important that each of your points transitions seamlessly into the next one so that your speech has a logical flow. Work on your  connecting sentences  between each of your themes so that your speech is easy to listen to.

Your argument should be backed up by objective research and not purely your subjective opinion. Use examples, analogies, and stories so that the audience can relate more easily to your topic, and therefore are more likely to be persuaded to your point of view.

3. Addressing counter-arguments

Any balanced theory or thought  addresses and disputes counter-arguments  made against it. By addressing these, you’ll strengthen your persuasive speech by refuting your audience’s objections and you’ll show that you are knowledgeable to other thoughts on the topic.

When describing an opposing point of view, don’t explain it in a bias way – explain it in the same way someone who holds that view would describe it. That way, you won’t irritate members of your audience who disagree with you and you’ll show that you’ve reached your point of view through reasoned judgement. Simply identify any counter-argument and pose explanations against them.

• Complete Guide to Debating

4. Closing your speech

Your closing line of your speech is your last chance to convince your audience about what you’re saying. It’s also most likely to be the sentence they remember most about your entire speech so make sure it’s a good one!

The most effective persuasive speeches end  with a  call to action . For example, if you’ve been speaking about organ donation, your call to action might be asking the audience to register as donors.

Practice answering AI questions on your speech and get  feedback on your performance .

If audience members ask you questions, make sure you listen carefully and respectfully to the full question. Don’t interject in the middle of a question or become defensive.

You should show that you have carefully considered their viewpoint and refute it in an objective way (if you have opposing opinions). Ensure you remain patient, friendly and polite at all times.

Example 1: Persuasive speech outline

This example is from the Kentucky Community and Technical College.

Specific purpose

To persuade my audience to start walking in order to improve their health.

Central idea

Regular walking can improve both your mental and physical health.

Introduction

Let’s be honest, we lead an easy life: automatic dishwashers, riding lawnmowers, T.V. remote controls, automatic garage door openers, power screwdrivers, bread machines, electric pencil sharpeners, etc., etc. etc. We live in a time-saving, energy-saving, convenient society. It’s a wonderful life. Or is it?

Continue reading

Example 2: Persuasive speech

Tips for delivering your persuasive speech

• Practice, practice, and practice some more . Record yourself speaking and listen for any nervous habits you have such as a nervous laugh, excessive use of filler words, or speaking too quickly.
• Show confident body language . Stand with your legs hip width apart with your shoulders centrally aligned. Ground your feet to the floor and place your hands beside your body so that hand gestures come freely. Your audience won’t be convinced about your argument if you don’t sound confident in it. Find out more about  confident body language here .
• Don’t memorise your speech word-for-word  or read off a script. If you memorise your persuasive speech, you’ll sound less authentic and panic if you lose your place. Similarly, if you read off a script you won’t sound genuine and you won’t be able to connect with the audience by  making eye contact . In turn, you’ll come across as less trustworthy and knowledgeable. You could simply remember your key points instead, or learn your opening and closing sentences.
• Remember to use facial expressions when storytelling  – they make you more relatable. By sharing a personal story you’ll more likely be speaking your truth which will help you build a connection with the audience too. Facial expressions help bring your story to life and transport the audience into your situation.
• Keep your speech as concise as possible . When practicing the delivery, see if you can edit it to have the same meaning but in a more succinct way. This will keep the audience engaged.

The best persuasive speech ideas are those that spark a level of controversy. However, a public speech is not the time to express an opinion that is considered outside the norm. If in doubt, play it safe and stick to topics that divide opinions about 50-50.

Bear in mind who your audience are and plan your persuasive speech outline accordingly, with researched evidence to support your argument. It’s important to consider counter-arguments to show that you are knowledgeable about the topic as a whole and not bias towards your own line of thought.

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser .

T4Tutorials.com

Speech on social media [1, 2, 3, 5 minutes].

1 Minute Speech on social media

Hello to Everyone.

Social media has firmly established itself in our daily lives. We can stay in touch with friends and family, keep up with current affairs, and even learn new things thanks to technology. However, it’s crucial to keep in mind that anything we publish on social media is a reflection of who we are and could damage our reputation over time. Prior to posting, we should consider our words and the information we share. Let’s appropriately use social media and turn it into a beneficial influence on our lives. I’m grateful.

2 Minute Speech on social media

Social media has firmly established itself in our daily lives. We can stay in touch with friends and family, keep up with current affairs, and even learn new things thanks to technology. However, it’s crucial to keep in mind that anything we publish on social media is a reflection of who we are and could damage our reputation over time. Prior to posting, we should consider our words and the information we share.

It’s critical to be conscious of how much time we spend on social media in addition to how and what we share. The endless scroll makes it simple to lose track of time, and before we realise it, hours have passed. Finding a balance is crucial in order to prevent us from neglecting our offline obligations or connections in favour of social media.

Let’s appropriately use social media and turn it into a beneficial influence on our lives. I’m grateful.

Quotes of some internationally famous personalities for Speech on social media

• “Change is never easy, but always possible.”
• “We are the change we seek.”
• “One child, one teacher, one book, one pen can change the world.”
• “Let us remember: One book, one pen, one child, and one teacher can change the world.”
• “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”
• “It always seems impossible until it’s done.”
• “Follow your passion. Stay true to yourself. Never follow someone else’s path unless you’re in the woods and you’re lost, and you see a path. By all means, you should follow that.”
• “The biggest risk is not taking any risk.”
• “The question isn’t, ‘What do we want to know about people?’, It’s, ‘What do people want to know about themselves?'”
• “If not me, who? If not now, when?”
• “Don’t let anyone tell you what you can and can’t do or achieve. Do what you want to do and be who you want to be.”
• “The internet, in particular, offers immense possibilities for encounter and solidarity. May it be a space for building a more inclusive and fraternal world.”
• “Let us not forget that authentic power is service.”
• “Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.”
• “We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten. Don’t let yourself be lulled into inaction.”
• “The biggest adventure you can take is to live the life of your dreams.”
• “Surround yourself with only people who are going to lift you higher.”
• “If something is important enough, even if the odds are stacked against you, you should still do it.”
• “When something is important enough, you do it even if the odds are not in your favor.”

3 Minute Speech on social media

Ladies and gentlemen!

I want to talk to you about social media  sites today and how it affects our daily life

On the one hand, social media  sites has greatly increased connectedness and made it simpler for us to communicate with friends and family, particularly during the epidemic when many of us were geographically separated.

Additionally, it has provided a forum for people and organisations to communicate information and ideas to a large audience.

But there are also drawbacks to take into account.

Social media  sites can be enticing and take up a lot of our time, which reduces productivity and in-person interaction.

As we compare ourselves to others and feel pressure to project a specific image online, it may also be a cause of anxiety and tension.

Concerns regarding privacy and the usage of personal information by social media  sites corporations are another issue.

When registering for these sites, it’s crucial that we read the terms of service and take precautions to protect our privacy.

Overall, even if social media sites offers numerous advantages, it’s crucial to utilise it carefully and sparingly.

I’m grateful.

5 Minute Speech on social media

Ladies and gentlemen! I want to talk to you about social media  sites today. Social media  sites has completely changed the way we engage and communicate with one another in our daily lives.

Social media sites offers a lot of advantages in our daily life including:

• Connectivity: Social media enables us to maintain contact with loved ones who may be geographically separated.
• Information access: We can keep up with current events and issues that interest us thanks to social media platforms, which are a great source of news and information.
• Possibilities for self-expression: Social media provides us with a stage on which to communicate our ideas, emotions, and experiences to a large audience.
• Marketing and advertising: Organizations can utilise social media to advertise and market their goods and services to a wide audience.
• Networking: Professional networking and job prospects can be found using social media.
• Community building: Social media enables users to interact and create online groups with shared interests.
• Activism and social change: Social media has been utilised as a tool for activism and drawing attention to significant social and political concerns.
• Amusement: The capacity to share and find fascinating stuff on social media makes it a potential source of entertainment.

But it’s crucial to keep in mind that social media  sites may also be harmful.

Additionally, there are a number of drawbacks to using social media, including;

Addiction: It is simple to develop a social media addiction and spend excessive amounts of time there, which reduces productivity and in-person interactions.

Cyberbullying: With the ability to reach a large audience, social media can serve as a breeding ground for this type of bullying.

Mental health: Regular social media use has been associated with detrimental effects on mental health, including elevated levels of anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem.

Lack of privacy: There are worries regarding privacy on social media due to the possibility of third parties receiving access to personal information and data.

Misinformation propagation: False or incorrect information can be transmitted fast and widely on social media, which can be a source of misinformation.

Time-consuming: Social media may be a time waster and a source of distraction from other, more crucial pursuits.

Comparison and FOMO: Viewing highlight reels of others on social media can cause feelings of comparison and FOMO, which can be detrimental to one’s self-esteem.

Distraction: It’s simple to get sucked into social media and lose focus on other pressing obligations and chores. At the last, I want to say that despite the fact that social media  sites has a lot of advantages, it is crucial to use it properly and to be aware of any potential drawbacks. I’m grateful.

More Speeches

• Speech on women’s empowerment
• Speech on social media
• Speech on environment
• Speech on gender equality
• Speech on poverty
• Speech on Global Warming
• Speech on Environmental Pollution
• Speech on Earth Day
• Speech on Discipline
• Speech on Human Rights
• Speech on Education
• Motivational speech for students
• 2-minute Self-introduction speech examples
• Speech on Mahatma Gandhi
• Speech on freedom fighters
• Speech on APJ Abdul Kalam
• Speech about friendship
• Speech about Technology
• Speech on Parents
• Speech on Health
• Speech on Health and Fitness
• Speech on Health and Hygiene
• Speech on Mental health
• Speech on Yoga
• Speech on Doctor
• Speech about Life
• Speech on sports
• Speech on Racism
• Speech on Population or overpopulation
• Speech on Overcoming Fear
• Speech about Family
• Speech on Mobile Phones
• Speech on water conservation
• Speech on Honesty
• Speech on Culture
• Speech on Unity in diversity
• Speech on Peace
• Speech on Time
• Speech on Success
• Speech on Leadership
• Speech on Nature
• Speech on Career
• Speech about Music
• Speech on Democracy
• Speech on Noise Pollution
• Speech on Air Pollution
• Speech on Gratitude
• Speech on Time management
• Speech on Dance
• Speech on Climate Change
• Speech on Artificial Intelligence
• Speech on Cyber security
• Speech on Teamwork
• Speech on Goal Setting
• Speech on Plastic Waste Management
• Speech on Feminism
• Speech on Bhagat Singh
• Speech on Books
• Speech on Laughter is the Best Medicine
• Speech on Swami Vivekananda
• Speech on Road Safety
• Speech on Cyber Crime
• Speech on Energy Conservation
• Speech on Online Education
• Speech on Quaid-e-Azam
• Speech on Allama Iqbal
• Speech about Rainy Day
• Speech about Teachers’ day
• Speech about Graduation
• Speech about Love
• Speech about Football
• Speech about Money
• Speech about Anxiety
• Speech about Politics
• Speech about Nelson Mandela
• Speech about Kindness
• Speech about Cleanliness
• Speech about Deforestation
• Speech about Agriculture
• speech about Cricket
• Speech about Unemployment
• Speech about Birthday
• Speech about Patience
• Speech about the Value of Time
• Speech about Positive Thinking
• Speech about Knowledge is Power
• Speech about Games
• Speech about Indian Culture
• Speech about Appreciation
• Speech about Farming
• Speech about Debut
• Speech about Purpose
• Speech about Hardwork
• Speech about Thank you / Thankfulness / being thankful
• Speeches about Communication
• Speech about Dreams and ambitions 
• Speech about Confidence
• Speech about traveling and Tourism
• Speech about Corruption
• Speech about the millennial generation
• Speech about Success and Failure
• Speech about Environmental Awareness
• Speech about Life Goals
• Speech about Stress
• Speech about the Life of a Student
• Speech about Social Issues
• Speech about Mom
• Speech about God
• Speech about Plants
• Speech about Fashion
• Speech about Basketball
• Speech about Business
• Speech about Smile
• Speech about Animals
• Speech about Passion
• Speech about Youth Empowerment
• Speech about Youth Leadership
• Speech about Responsibility
• Speech about Plastic Pollution
• Speech about Courage
• Speech about Homework
• Short Speech about Engineering
• Speech about Positive Attitude
• Speech about Dad
• Speech about my Favourite Teacher
• Speech about Electricity
• Speech about pen
• Speech about Family Problems
• Speech about Compassion
• Speech about Achievement
• Speech about Challenges
• Speech about Modern Technology
• Speech about Opportunity
• Speech about Anti Corruption
• Speech about Nursing Profession
• Speech about Innovation
• Speech about Wisdom
• Speech about Air
• Speech about Change in the World
• Speech about Quality Education
• Speech about Dedication
• Speech about Motherhood
• Speech about Clean Environment
• Speech about National Integration
• Speech about Body Language
• Speech about an Event
• Speech about Healthy Habits
• Speech about Listening
• Speech about Humour
• Speech about Memory
• Speech about the Importance of Sports and Games
• Speech about Happy Life
• Speech about Growing up
• Speech about Soldiers
• Speech about Television
• Speech about my Favourite Book
• Speech about Mother Nature
• Speech about Moral Education
• Speech about Mathematics
• Speech about Perseverance
• Speech about Oral Communication
• Speech about My Pet
• Speech about Determination
• Speech about Studies
• Speech about community
• Speech about best friend
• Speech about depression
• Speech about marriage
• Speech on Natural disasters
•  Speech on 15 August
• Persuasive Speech on bulling
• Speech on life

Related Posts:

• [PPSC Pakistan] SYLLABUS SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER/ MEDICAL SOCIAL OFFICER / DEPUTY DISTRICT OFFICER (SW) SOCIAL WELFARE & BAIT UL MAAL DEPARTMENT
• Facebook like Social Media login logout code in PHP
• Paragraph on Social Media [Class 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10], [Words]
• Social media Research Topics
• Standard sizes of images for Famous Social media platforms
• Research questions for social media

Speech on Impact Of Social Media On Youth

Social media’s influence on youth is like a double-sided coin, having both positive and negative effects. It’s a tool you use daily, shaping your ideas, behavior, and relationships.

On one side, it connects you with the world, boosting creativity and learning. On the flip side, it can lead to addiction, cyberbullying, and mental health issues.

1-minute Speech on Impact Of Social Media On Youth

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Today, I want to talk about a topic close to all our hearts – social media and its impact on our youth. Let’s start with the good stuff. Social media is like a big classroom. It’s a place where young minds can learn new things, meet new friends, and share their ideas with the world. Social media sites like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter help us to stay connected with people far and wide.

But, as with everything in life, there’s also a flip side. Sometimes, social media can be a tricky place for young people. It’s easy to get lost in the world of likes, shares, and comments. Many young people feel pressured to look a certain way or to live a certain life – all because of what they see on social media. This can lead to stress, anxiety, and even depression.

It’s also important to remember that not everything on social media is true. People often only show their best selves, leaving others to feel like they’re not good enough. This is a problem – it’s like comparing your behind-the-scenes with someone else’s highlight reel.

Let’s not forget that social media can also be a distraction. Too much time spent scrolling through feeds can lead to less time spent on important things like studying, playing, or interacting with family and friends in the real world.

In conclusion, social media is a tool. Like any tool, it can be used for good or bad. It’s up to us, the users, to decide how we want to use it. We need to help our youth understand the benefits and pitfalls of social media. With the right guidance, we can ensure they harness the power of social media to learn, grow and thrive, while staying safe and healthy.

Also check:

• Essay on Impact Of Social Media On Youth

2-minute Speech on Impact Of Social Media On Youth

Good day, everyone! We’re here to talk about a topic that touches all of us – the impact of social media on youth. Let’s break this down into four clear parts – communication, learning, mental health, and privacy.

Firstly, social media has revolutionized communication. Today, young folks can chat with friends and family from any corner of the world in an instant. They share photos, videos, and thoughts, creating a global community that feels like a small village. It makes them feel connected and gives them a platform to express themselves. So, social media is a great tool for communication.

Secondly, social media is a powerful source for learning. Youth can access a world of information at their fingertips. They can learn about cultures, languages, science, arts, and so much more. They can follow pages that feed their curiosity, join groups of like-minded people, and even start online courses. Thus, social media is a rich resource for knowledge.

Next, let’s talk about mental health. Social media is like a double-edged sword. On one side, it can boost self-esteem and well-being by helping youth find their tribe and express themselves. On the other side, it can also lead to stress, anxiety, and depression. The pressure to look perfect, to get likes and followers, can be overwhelming. The constant flow of news and information can also be stressful. Therefore, it’s essential to use social media wisely and take breaks from it when needed.

Lastly, privacy is a significant concern. Social media platforms collect a lot of data about their users. This data can be used for good, like improving user experience and providing personalized content. But it can also be used for not-so-good things, like targeted ads and even cybercrime. It’s crucial for youth to understand this and to learn how to protect their privacy online.

As we wrap up, let’s remember that social media is a tool. Like any tool, it can be used for good or bad. What matters is how we use it. So, let’s encourage our youth to use social media responsibly. Let’s help them understand the risks and benefits. And let’s remind them that, while social media is a fun and useful tool, it’s not the only thing that matters. There’s a big, beautiful world out there to explore, and life is about much more than likes and followers.

Thank you for your time and attention. Let’s take this conversation forward and make social media a positive force for our youth!

• Speech on Impact Of Social Media
• Speech on Impact Of Smartphones
• Speech on Impact Of Cinema In Life

We also have speeches on more interesting topics that you may want to explore.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

How to Address Political Speech on Social Media in the United States

Policymakers could improve content moderation on social media by building international consensus on content moderation guidelines, providing more resources to address state-sponsored disinformation, and increasing transparency in content moderation decisions.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Key takeaways.

Key Takeaways 1

Introduction . 3

The Debate Over Content Moderation on Social Media . 4

Summary of Proposals 7

Free Market Solutions 10

Status Quo . 10

Crowdsourced Content Moderation . 12

Industry-Developed Best Practices 13

Rule Changes 14

Transparency Requirements 15

Equal Time Rule . 16

First Amendment Reinterpretation . 17

Regulations on Algorithms and Targeted Advertising . 18

Technical Reforms 19

Data Portability and Interoperability Requirements 19

Public Funding . 20

Structural Changes 21

Antitrust 21

Common Carrier Regulation . 22

Nationalization . 23

Government-Run Social Media Platform . 24

Commissions, Boards, and Councils 25

Company Oversight Boards 25

Company Advisory Councils 26

National Commission . 26

Multistakeholder Forum . 27

Recommendations 28

Endnotes 31

Introduction

The primary reason the debate over how to regulate large social media companies’ content moderation policies and practices has become so polarized and intractable in the United States is the political Left and Right do not agree on the problem. Many conservatives believe that large social media companies have a liberal bias and censor conservative users and viewpoints, unfairly using their market power to advance a liberal agenda and promote a “cancel culture.” In contrast, many liberals believe that large social media companies insufficiently police hate speech, election disinformation, and other dangerous speech they believe undermines democracy. So while liberals are demanding social media companies more zealously take down content and deplatform users, conservatives are pushing for these same companies to show more restraint and prudence in their content moderation policies. In the end, both sides blame large social media companies, but offer little in terms of bipartisan consensus on how to move forward.

Social media companies face a no-win scenario: Policymakers have placed the onus on them to address complex content moderation questions, but then attack them when they do. When they remove controversial content, critics say they are eroding free speech; and when they allow that content to remain, critics say they are spreading misinformation and undermining democracy. The January 6 insurrection provides an illustrative example. One side blames social media companies for failing to act sooner against users sharing false allegations of a stolen election, while the other argues these companies overreacted by banning a sitting U.S. president from their platforms along with his supporters. [1]

As detailed in this report, there have been multiple proposals put forth to address this issue—usually by shifting more responsibility for content moderation on industry, users, or government—but all fall short for one reason or another. Therefore, a new approach is necessary to overcome this impasse. To create a path forward, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) recommends the following:

First, the U.S. government should establish an international forum for participants from the Group of Seven (G7) nations to develop voluntary, consensus-based content moderation guidelines for social media based on shared democratic values. The goal would be to create a forum for individuals from businesses, governments, academia, and civil society to exchange insights and perspectives and create guidelines that help social media platforms ensure their content moderation processes prioritize transparency, accountability, and due process while balancing free speech and addressing harmful speech. By leveraging an open multistakeholder process, this international forum could develop best practices that not only positively impact content moderation on social media, but also gain acceptance among policymakers around the world.

Second, the U.S. government should help social media platforms respond to state-sponsored harmful content, such as Russian disinformation and Chinese bots. For example, U.S. government agencies could fund academic research to improve methods for identifying and responding to state-backed disinformation campaigns or develop better information sharing arrangements between government and social media companies about potential threats.

Third, Congress should pass legislation establishing transparency requirements for content moderation decisions of social media platforms. This legislation should require social media platforms to disclose their content moderation policies describing what content and behavior they allow and do not allow, how they enforce these rules, and how users can appeal moderation decisions—disclosures that most large social media platforms already make. Additionally, the law should require platforms to enforce their content moderation policies consistently and create an appeals process for users to challenge content moderation decisions, if one does not already exist. To increase transparency, platforms should publicly release annual reports on their content moderation enforcement actions.

Content moderation suffers from a crisis of legitimacy, and social media companies cannot resolve this issue on their own. There will always be people who disagree on specific content moderation policies or castigate social media companies for their role in enforcing these policies. However, by building international consensus on content moderation guidelines, providing more resources to address state-sponsored misinformation and disinformation, and increasing transparency in content moderation decisions, policymakers can address the most serious problems and offer social media platforms best practices that balance competing interests.

The Debate Over Content Moderation on Social Media

To paraphrase Bill Gates, the Internet has become the town square of a global village. [2] Before the Internet, the primary ways individuals could broadcast their unfiltered views were expensive and time consuming and had limited reach, such as by mailing newsletters, distributing flyers, placing posters in public places, or shouting from the street corner. The rise of user-generated content—especially blogs, podcasts, and social media platforms—has not only lowered the cost of direct communication, but has empowered anyone on the Internet to bypass traditional gatekeepers, such as print and broadcast news media, and make their views available to everyone else online. This development is exciting and transformative but has also brought new challenges with these new opportunities.

The promise and peril of social media in particular has become a focus of heated debate because it is the communication platform on which users wage ideological battles, campaign for elections, and strive to win hearts and minds during wars and revolutions. And unlike the town squares of the past, which fell directly under the jurisdiction of government, today’s digital town squares are owned and operated by private corporations. This change raises new questions about not only governance and regulation, but also the future of free speech.

While both the Internet and social media will continue to evolve, the technology has given voice to millions of users worldwide—and that genie cannot be put back in the bottle. Therefore, the task ahead is how to establish a governance system for social media that matches the nature of the medium. One of the biggest challenges is content moderation on social media.

This report provides an analysis of the various proposed solutions to improve content moderation of political speech on large social media platforms. “Political speech” refers not only to speech by political officials or about politics (including political ads) but any noncommercial speech protected by the First Amendment that involves matters of public concern. This definition encompasses a broad variety of speech on social media, from posts by government officials and those running for office to commentary about political issues from ordinary citizens. Naturally, this definition excludes commercial speech (e.g., advertising to promote business interests), as well as various types of unprotected speech, including obscenities, defamation, fraud, or incitement to violence.

This report mostly considers the impact of proposals on the largest social media companies because they have been the primary focus of policymakers. However, the definition of “large” is subjective. The largest social media platforms globally include a number with over a billion active users, including Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, and TikTok. But many others also include hundreds of millions of active users worldwide, including QQ, Weibo, Telegram, Snapchat, Kuaishou, Pinterest, Twitter, and Reddit, and could hardly be called small. [3] Alternatively, policymakers could only target policies at social media companies based on the number of domestic users, and in the United States, there are a handful with over 10 million active monthly users that could be added to this list, including Reddit, Snapchat, and Discord (see figure 1 and figure 2). [4] In addition, if the goal is to impact influential platforms, policymakers should not ignore small and medium-sized social media platforms, including emerging ones, such as Gettr, Parler, Gab, and Truth Social. Although these platforms do not have as many users as larger ones do, prominent users on these platforms may still have a significant reach across these social networks.

Figure 1 : Percentages of U.S. adults who use popular social media apps (Pew Research Center, 2021) [5]

Figure 2 : Total unique U.S. adult mobile users of popular social media apps (ComScore, November 2021)

Finding common ground on moderating political speech is difficult because there are a number of areas of disagreement beyond the question of whether social media platforms should be removing more or less content. While many of these disagreements break down along party lines, others reflect other ideological disagreements, often about the role of government in regulating private companies:

▪ Should social media platforms prioritize protecting free speech, or should they prevent the spread of misinformation, harmful content, and objectionable material?

▪ Should social media platforms be politically neutral, or should they be allowed to have their own political biases?

▪ Should social media platforms set their own content moderation policies, or should someone else have this authority?

▪ Should social media platforms treat all users the same, or should certain users, such as elected officials, have special privileges?

▪ Should social media platforms be required to enforce their rules consistently, or should they be allowed to act arbitrarily?

▪ Should social media platforms be transparent about content moderation decisions, or should they be allowed to make decisions privately?

▪ Should social media platforms operate closed ecosystems, or should they be forced to be interoperable with other platforms?

▪ Should social media platforms be liable for harmful third-party content, or should those who produce that content be responsible?

Summary of Proposals

There have been a number of proposals for how to address political speech on social media, which generally fall into the following categories:

▪ Free market solutions: These proposals focus on minimal government intervention and instead rely on industry to address the issues as they see fit.

▪ Rule changes: These proposals involve legislative or regulatory changes that would impact how social media companies could do business, such as requiring platforms to offer equal access to their platform to all political candidates.

▪ Technical reforms: These proposals focus on incentives or requirements for companies to make technical reforms to their algorithms or services.

▪ Structural changes: These proposals would involve extensive government intervention to change the way social media operates on a structural level, such as by breaking up or nationalizing large social media companies.

▪ Commissions, boards, and councils: These proposals focus on building a consensus on what the problems are with the current state of online political speech and creating best practices companies can use for guidance in dealing with those problems that balance concerns over freedom of speech and harmful content.

Table 1: Summary of proposals to address political speech on social media

Free Market Solutions

One category of proposals would involve no government regulation and would instead allow social media platforms to continue to set their own content moderation practices. These proposals include maintaining the status quo, implementing crowdsourced content moderation strategies, and creating industry-led best practices for content moderation. Because these proposals require no government intervention, they avoid questions of constitutionality, but are likely to raise questions of legitimacy among social media’s critics.

One proposal to address the issue of political speech on social media is to maintain the status quo, with no additional government regulation and no industry-wide coordination. Different social media platforms would continue to set their own content moderation policies regarding harmful-but-legal content, with users choosing which platforms to use based on their policies.

The benefit of this is it does not force a one-size-fits-all approach to online political speech. Currently, politicians and stakeholders are far from reaching a consensus on what type of lawful content is harmful and how much of this harmful-but-legal content should be allowed on social media. Forms of harmful or objectionable speech such as hate speech, misinformation and disinformation, and violence are not black and white, and even reasonable people disagree about where to draw the line on what is harmful and what is acceptable free speech.

In the absence of government regulation, market forces can and have motivated social media companies to change their content moderation policies and practices. For example, after Russian-backed disinformation campaigns used social media to attempt to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Facebook implemented a series of changes to prevent deceptive advertising, including by making advertising more transparent, improving enforcement for improper ads, tightening restrictions on ad content, and increasing requirements to confirm the identity of advertisers. [6]

One of critics’ main arguments against maintaining the status quo and allowing social media platforms to continue to set their own policies is, when the dominant platforms make up a substantial portion of online speech—with 1.82 billion daily active users on Facebook and 126 million on Twitter—those platforms’ decisions have wide-reaching effects on the rest of society. [7] Critics argue that Facebook and Twitter have amassed such large user bases that choosing to abandon one or both platforms based on their content moderation decisions would cut people off from an important source of information and avenue for communication.

Facebook and Twitter do have competition, including from more established players such as Reddit and Snapchat—with 52 million and 293 million daily active users, respectively—as well as from newer players such as TikTok, which had 50 million daily active users in the United States in 2020 (and only continues to grow). [8] Additionally, YouTube, another dominant social media platform, has largely avoided political and media scrutiny compared with Facebook and Twitter. [9] Political discourse occurs on all of these platforms, as well as elsewhere online.

Facebook and Twitter also face competition from social media platforms, such as Parler, Gettr, Rumble, and Truth Social, designed to cater to those who believe mainstream platforms unfairly silence conservative voices. However, many of these social media companies have struggled to enact content moderation policies that allow controversial forms of content outside the mainstream. For example, following the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, Apple and Google removed Parler from their respective app stores and Amazon Web Services removed the company from its cloud hosting service. [10] After Parler adjusted its content moderation policies and practices, including by excluding certain objectionable content from its iOS mobile app, Apple allowed the app back on the Apple Store in May 2021. [11] Google allowed the Parler app back in the Google Play Store in September 2022, although before then, Android users could load it from alternative app stores. [12] Similarly, Truth Social, the social media app backed by former president Trump, has found that it must comply with the content moderation standards of app stores if it wants to reach their users. [13] Although these actions are examples of companies exercising their right to freedom of association, they demonstrate the difficulty of establishing a social media platform that allows controversial content.

Different social media platforms have different content moderation policies that reflect their different uses, user bases, and goals. However, there are some forms of content—for example, extremist content—that pose a significant risk of harm to society that social media platforms have historically struggled to effectively address through their content moderation practices. [14] Many companies lack the expertise to effectively address this type of content without guidance, and others, especially the smaller ones, may lack the resources. [15] Additionally, there is a lack of consensus on which content to classify as harmful—as some may think certain content is harmful while others think it is legitimate—as well as the best response, such as allowing counter speech versus removing content. [16]

Some issues are especially complex and consequential, such as how to handle government officials who post harmful content or break companies’ terms of service—and there is no consensus on these issues. There are also questions about due process, such as whether there are sufficient appeals mechanisms when platforms make mistakes enforcing their rules and whether it is appropriate for social media companies to both make and enforce the rules. [17]

Although stakeholders do not agree on how to strike the right balance between reducing harmful content on social media and protecting free speech online, many critics on both sides of the aisle agree that the status quo is not tenable. One risk of maintaining the status quo too long is it may eventually generate enough opposition that lawmakers decide to impose objectionable changes that leave users worse off. For example, Germany passed the controversial Network Enforcement Law (NetzDG) in 2017 requiring social media companies with more than 2 million registered users in the country to respond quickly to online hate speech or face severe fines, a requirement critics say chills free speech online. [18] U.S. lawmakers have proposed a number of controversial laws that would impact content moderation—often with unintended consequences—and have likely generated interest less because of the specifics of the proposals and more due to the mounting frustration that lawmakers should be doing more to address a perceived problem. [19]

Another risk to maintaining the status quo for U.S. policymakers is other countries may enact their own laws and regulations for online political speech that impact not just those within their borders, but also Internet users globally. For example, the EU could unilaterally impose its own set of laws and regulations on the process large social media companies must use to respond to complaints about content moderation that would likely set a global baseline. If the United States intends to play a proactive role in shaping these debates in order to safeguard its national interests and values of free speech and innovation, simply upholding the status quo may not be in its best interests.

Crowdsourced Content Moderation

Another free market approach to online political speech would be for social media platforms to crowdsource their content moderation. Many platforms allow users to report inappropriate content, but users do not make content moderation decisions. In this approach, ordinary users would take part in directly moderating content on a platform, such as by making decisions to remove harmful content, ban users, or add labels to misinformation. Crowdsourced content moderation could either take the place of the platform’s own content moderators or supplement them.

Wikipedia, while not a social network, is perhaps the best-known website that uses crowdsourced content moderation. Since its inception, it has allowed ordinary users to write and edit articles on the site. [20] The platform has community-developed and -enforced policies and guidelines in place that determine permissible content and user behavior. [21] Wikipedia’s content moderation process is not perfect—for example, false information still can slip past its editors and some editors report regular harassment—but using volunteers allows Wikipedia to avoid hiring thousands of writers and editors. [22] The popular social network Reddit, which hosts many different communities, each with their own unique rules, also uses volunteer moderators rather than employees to moderate content on its platform. [23]

Twitter is testing out this approach with its Birdwatch pilot program, which allows regular users to place labels on content containing misinformation and rate each other’s labels. Currently, the labels are not visible for Twitter users who are not part of the program, but if the pilot is successful, Twitter plans to expand it to the main site. The goal is for the Twitter community to be able to react quickly when misinformation starts to spread. [24]

Community moderation could solve one of the problems currently facing social media platforms when it comes to political speech, which is that many people do not trust the social media companies to fairly moderate content. Increasingly, critics of social media have expressed their concerns that a few large companies can control a large portion of online political discourse. Community moderation would take some of that control out of the hands of companies and put it into the hands of ordinary users.

But the approach that has allowed Wikipedia to compile a global encyclopedia of facts and knowledge may not work as well when more subjective forms of content are involved, especially controversial political speech. Indeed, fiery debates and edit wars regularly engulf politically sensitive subjects on Wikipedia. [25] Social media platforms have to either enforce volunteer moderators guidelines, in which case they are still be making important decisions regarding which forms of online political speech are acceptable, or they have to trust their community to make the right decisions as a collective, which could damage online political discourse by drowning out controversial political beliefs.

Crowdsourced content moderation also requires a lot of volunteer time, especially to counter intentional efforts by an active minority of users to overrule the majority. And given the high stakes of controlling content moderation on some large platforms, there could be strong incentives for certain groups to try to gain control of content moderation decisions. Even with these shortcomings, crowdsourced content moderation could be an important tool in social media platforms’ tool kit. However, it is unlikely to solve the larger debate surrounding online political speech.

Industry-Developed Best Practices

The final free market proposal to address political speech on social media would be to encourage the major social media platforms to develop a set of industry-wide best practices for moderating political speech. These best practices would address the most pressing content moderation problems, including how to improve transparency, how to handle government figures posting prohibited content, how to find and remove illegal content most effectively, and how to address harmful-but-legal content. These best practices could also describe various remedies, such as removing, labeling, demonetizing, deprioritizing, or otherwise restricting content or users.

The benefit of a set of industry-wide best practices over social media companies’ current individualized approaches is it would allow companies to take a unified approach to important issues. This is especially important when it comes to harmful and illegal content: If certain platforms take a stricter approach to removing harmful and illegal content than others do, individuals and organizations involved in creating and proliferating that content will flock to the platforms that take a more lax approach. But if all major platforms work together to eliminate forms of harmful and illegal content, creators of that content will have few places to congregate and the content will be less visible to the larger online community.

There are examples of other industries that use self-regulation to protect consumers without involving the government. For instance, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), a trade association representing major film studios, established its ratings system in 1968 to inform parents on whether a film might be appropriate for children of various ages. [26] In the legal field, the American Bar Association (ABA) created standards for law school accreditation in 1921 and has developed standards of ethics in the legal field since 1908. [27]

However, there are downsides to an industry-wide approach. First, there is a benefit to different social media platforms having different content moderation policies. If all major social media companies moderated content in the same or similar ways, users who disagreed with certain moderation decisions would have fewer places to go to express themselves online.

Second, these best practices would not be legally binding, meaning social media companies could choose not to follow them. Even if all the major social media platforms adhered to industry best practices, there would likely be smaller services that did not, and creators of harmful and illegal content would gather there. This already occurs on an Internet where most major social media platforms have similar, though not identical, content moderation policies, leading bad actors to congregate on less-policed platforms. 4chan, an anonymous forum-based social media platform notable for its lack of rules, has become synonymous with harmful or controversial user behavior, including celebrity nude photo leaks, the Gamergate movement, cyberbullying, and fake bomb threats. [28] When 4chan cracked down on some of these activities, a similar platform with even fewer restrictions on user behavior, 8chan, grew in popularity, attracting conspiracy theorists and extremists. [29]

Finally, given the intense public and media scrutiny directed at major social media companies—part of the larger “techlash” against big tech companies—many critics would be skeptical of an industry-led approach. [30] Social media companies would still take the blame for content moderation failures or controversies. In order for both platforms and users to benefit from content moderation standards, there needs to be third-party involvement to lend legitimacy to the effort.

Rule Changes

Instead of relying solely on social media companies to solve the debate surrounding online political speech, the second category of proposals would involve legislative or regulatory changes that would impact how those companies could do business. These proposals include transparency requirements for social media platforms, an “equal time rule” for online political advertisements, reinterpreting the First Amendment to apply to social media companies, and regulations on social media algorithms and targeted advertising.

Government intervention could lend legitimacy to efforts to change the way social media handles political speech, but it could also create further polarization. For example, when the Biden administration established a Disinformation Governance Board at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in April 2022, critics quickly characterized it as an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth,” until DHS eventually shut down the board in response to the backlash. [31] Without bipartisan consensus, legislative or regulatory changes could seesaw back and forth with changes in political power, as has occurred with other partisan issues such as net neutrality.

Moreover, government intervention risks disrupting innovation in an ecosystem that has thrived for more than two decades in part due to the U.S. government’s light-touch approach to regulation. For example, some proposals could tie the hands of social media companies, preventing them from addressing controversial content that degrades the experience of their platforms or limits their ability to deliver targeted advertising to users and keep their services free to use.

Transparency Requirements

One proposed rule change would require social media platforms to be more transparent in their content moderation. A transparency requirement would continue to allow companies to set their own rules for what content is not allowed on their platforms but would require them to be clear about those rules and how they enforce them. Platforms would also be responsible for enforcing their rules consistently. Some advocates also want social media companies to increase transparency of their algorithms used to recommend content.

More transparent content moderation would help address concerns that platforms are biased against certain demographics or ideas. Platforms would have to clearly lay out what content and behavior are not allowed, how the platforms find and respond to banned content, how users can report banned content, and how users can appeal moderation decisions. Platforms would then have to adhere to those standards consistently and report regularly on their content moderation, with publicly accessible data on how many posts were removed and users were banned in a given time period, why those actions were taken (i.e., what rules were violated), how many of those decisions were appealed, and how many of those appeals were successful.

This transparency would also have benefits for data collection and research. Social media researchers could more easily track trends in content moderation and the prevalence of different forms of harmful and illegal content. This would lead to increased platform accountability and potentially help platforms, governments, and other organizations formulate a response to forms of harmful and illegal content.

Algorithmic transparency, on the other hand, would require platforms to give information about how their various algorithms work. This could include information on how algorithms sort and recommend content, target advertisements, and moderate content. Proponents argue this would reveal whether platforms are amplifying harmful content. But algorithmic transparency requirements could reveal proprietary information competitors could use. The effectiveness of a social media company’s algorithms is part of what draws users to a platform, keeps users on the platform, and earns companies advertising revenue. Any algorithm transparency requirements should not compel companies to disclose proprietary information about their algorithms to the public.

One recent effort to mandate increased transparency from social media companies, the Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency (PACT) Act, S. 797, would require increased transparency surrounding platforms’ content moderation policies and practices. [32] However, the bill’s requirement that platforms remove illegal content within four days could lead to platforms over-censoring content by removing content that is not actually illegal, which would negatively impact free speech online. In addition, the bill would also give the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the power to take action against platforms for failing to remove policy-violating content, which would incentivize platforms to create lax policies that would allow more harmful-but-legal content most users do not want to see. [33]

Florida’s Transparency in Technology Act is another attempt to mandate increased transparency. But it also includes requirements that could create more problems than they solve. Related to transparency, it would require platforms to stop frequently changing their terms of service and obtain consent from users before changing their terms of service. [34] This would impede platforms’ ability to respond to new challenges and adapt to evolving situations.

Some transparency requirements are necessary to increase social media platform accountability, increase user trust, and improve social media research. But transparency requirements alone will still not solve the debate surrounding what forms of content should remain online.

Equal Time Rule

A second proposed rule change would specifically tackle the issue of political advertising on social media. This proposed “equal time” rule would require social media companies to give political candidates equal access to political and targeted advertising on their platforms regardless of party. Candidates would have the option to target the same audience their opponents target in order to combat opposing messages or correct false claims. [35]

The existing equal time rule, which applies to radio and television, arose from the Radio Act of 1927 and the Communications Act of 1934 and requires broadcasters to provide political candidates with equal treatment. If a broadcaster sells airtime to one political candidate, they must provide the same opportunity to that candidate’s opposition for the same price. [36]

Social media has become an increasingly important avenue for politicians to get their message to their intended audience. Between January 2019 and October 2020, Donald Trump’s campaign spent $107 million on Facebook ads, while Joe Biden’s campaign spent $94.2 million. [37] Proponents of an equal time rule argue that, given the gap in regulation between political ads on television and social media, candidates could take to social media to spread disinformation about their opponents, and target that disinformation to a specific audience. If opponents could target that same audience, they could correct that disinformation.

Additionally, proponents argue that, in the absence of an equal time rule, social media companies could sell ads to certain candidates and deny them to others, potentially influencing election outcomes. However, despite claims to the contrary, there is no evidence of major social media companies displaying political bias in their content moderation. [38] Additionally, not all false or misleading political ads come directly from politicians or their campaigns; they can instead come from unaffiliated individuals or organizations that support or oppose a certain candidate, party, or policy, as well as from bad actors such as the allegedly state-sponsored Russian “troll farms” that interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. [39]

A more effective approach to false or deceptive political ads on social media would be legislation that would require social media companies to increase transparency of paid political advertising on their platforms and make reasonable efforts to ensure foreign entities do not purchase political ads. This type of requirement would create parity between the transparency requirements for online and offline political ads and reduce the risk of foreign interference in U.S. elections.

Even if Congress did create transparency requirements for online political advertising, doing so would not address the larger controversy surrounding political speech on social media. There is plenty of political content on social media that is not advertising, including misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech. These forms of content are difficult to regulate without infringing on users’ or companies’ First Amendment rights, and will require a different approach.

First Amendment Reinterpretation

The most significant proposed rule change to address political speech on social media involves reinterpreting the First Amendment. Currently, the First Amendment only protects Americans from government censorship: Government actors cannot place limits on legal forms of speech or punish people for their speech. However, private actors, including companies, can restrict speech. For example, an employer can fire an employee for saying rude things to customers, a theater can kick out audience members who disrupt the movie, and a social media company can set rules for what content is allowed on its platform.

Reinterpreting the First Amendment would apply the same limitations to social media platforms that currently apply to government actors. Platforms could only restrict illegal forms of content, such as defamation, copyright infringement, and child sexual abuse material.

Proponents of this change argue that the largest social media companies currently have too much power to restrict speech. They liken social media platforms to public forums such as public parks and streets, where speech is protected. If an individual is deplatformed from major social media platforms, they lose access to one of the primary forums where modern political discourse takes place. [40]

Applying the First Amendment to social media companies would require courts to reverse decades of precedent stating that the First Amendment only applies to government actors, denying that social media platforms are public forums, and protecting companies’ own First Amendment rights to exercise editorial control over the content on their platforms. [41] This would also have ramifications for other private actors’ speech restrictions. Courts would have to redraw the lines of when it is acceptable for private actors to restrict speech and when it is not.

Finally, holding social media companies to a First Amendment standard for their users’ speech would completely change the landscape of the Internet. Currently, social media platforms remove millions of posts containing prohibited content many users do not want to see. Between April and June 2020, Facebook removed 22.5 million posts that violated its hate speech rules, 35.7 million posts that violated its rules regarding adult nudity and sexual activity, and 7 million posts that contained COVID-related misinformation. [42]

The First Amendment standard for government censorship of free speech is strict because, left unchecked, governments have enormous power to control speech and punish people for speech deemed unacceptable. Authoritarian regimes throughout history and around the world have imprisoned and killed journalists for reporting on government misconduct and regular people for protesting against the government or expressing ideas the government disagrees with. Companies, no matter how large or well funded, do not have the power to imprison people or put them to death for their speech.

There are a number of clear and compelling reasons why the law treats censorship from government actors and private actors differently. Without some amount of discretion to remove harmful-but-legal speech, social media platforms would become cesspools of spam, violence, and hateful language, making the Internet a worse place overall. Efforts to solve the issue of political speech online must specifically address the forms of content reasonable people from both sides of the aisle agree is harmful and create a consensus on how platforms should respond to this content that does not rely on the strict standards in the First Amendment.

Regulations on Algorithms and Targeted Advertising

The final proposed rule change to address political speech on social media would impose regulations on social media algorithms and targeted advertising. Algorithms and targeted advertising are key components of social media companies’ business models. An innovative algorithm that recommends relevant content to users can help social media companies build and maintain a strong user base, and targeted advertising is most companies’ primary source of revenue.

Proposed regulations would bring about major changes to the social media ecosystem by restricting platforms’ ability to use algorithms to recommend content or target advertisements to users. Some of these proposals would tie these restrictions to an existing law, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects online services and users from liability for third-party content. [43]

H.R. 8922, the Break Up Big Tech Act of 2020, would eliminate Section 230 protections for online services that sell targeted advertisements or display content in any order other than chronological. [44] H.R. 492, the Biased Algorithm Deterrence Act of 2019, and H.R. 8515, the Don’t Push My Buttons Act, would both eliminate protections for online services that filter, sort, or curate user-generated content. [45] Finally, S. 4337, the Behavioral Advertising Decisions Are Downgrading Services (BAD ADS) Act, would eliminate Section 230 protections for any online service that engages in behavioral advertising. [46]

Proponents of placing limits on social media algorithms and targeted advertising in order to restrict harmful political speech argue that platforms intentionally hook users on radical or extremist content because it keeps users engaged on their sites. [47] Without those algorithms, platforms couldn’t serve content to users based on their political beliefs, which proponents argue would lead to users engaging with less misinformation, disinformation, and extremism. Meanwhile, without targeted advertising, social media companies would have less incentive to keep people on their platforms.

However, restricting or disincentivizing the use of algorithms would negatively impact many of the features social media platforms offer, such as news feeds that sort stories according to what is most likely to interest users, and features that allow users to explore or discover new content that is similar to content they have liked or interacted with in the past. These features add immense value to users, whereas simply displaying content in chronological order would force users to scroll through content that does not interest them.

Additionally, proposals targeting behavioral advertising fail to acknowledge the benefits of displaying ads according to users’ preferences. Not only is selling targeted ads an important source of revenue for many online services—enabling them to offer their services to users for free and to continue offering new features and innovations to the site—it also results in users seeing ads for products and services that are more likely to interest them.

Regulations on social media algorithms and targeted advertising would force platforms to reinvent their services, charging for services that they currently offer to users for free and eliminating many of the features users find most useful or engaging. Any approach to solving the issue of online political speech needs to fix what is wrong with social media without breaking the parts of social media that give users value.

Technical Reforms

The third category of proposed solutions would also require government involvement, but instead of changing the rules by which social media companies operate, the government would incentivize or require companies to make technical reforms to their algorithms or services. These proposals include either data portability and interoperability requirements or public funding for social media algorithms.

Data Portability and Interoperability Requirements

The first proposed technical reform would require large social media platforms to adhere to data portability and interoperability requirements. Data portability would allow users to export their data and transfer it between competing social media platforms. Meanwhile, interoperability would allow users of competing social media platforms to communicate with each other across those platforms, much like users of different email services can communicate with each other. [48]

The political speech argument behind data portability and interoperability requirements is similar to the argument behind many other proposed changes: that a few big companies host, and therefore control, the majority of online speech. This, proponents argue, gives those companies too much power over political discourse. It also means that, when users are banned from one of the major platforms or choose not to use it because they disagree with the platform’s content moderation policies, they lose access to the millions or billions of other users on that platform.

Data portability and interoperability would make it easier for users to switch between platforms when one platform bans them or enacts policies users disagree with. For example, users who take issue with Twitter’s misinformation policies could transfer their data to Parler but continue to communicate with their friends and colleagues on Twitter.

H.R. 3849, the Augmenting Compatibility and Competition by Enabling Service Switching (ACCESS) Act of 2021, would require large social media platforms, online marketplaces, and search engines to allow users to export and transfer their data and maintain interoperability with competing businesses. The FTC could take action against platforms that fail to meet these requirements for engaging in unfair competition. [49]

The downside of data portability and interoperability requirements is they would limit social media platforms’ ability to effectively moderate content by banning users who repeatedly violate their terms of service. A platform cannot effectively ban someone if that user can simply go to another platform and send messages to other users on the original platform. Though this would protect users who feel they were deplatformed for illegitimate reasons, it would also protect users who were deplatformed for legitimate reasons, such as threatening or harassing other users, selling counterfeit goods, spreading spam or malware, or posting illegal content. [50]

Social media platforms need effective mechanisms for keeping certain users off their platforms. Otherwise, these platforms would become overrun by bot accounts and spam, rendering them virtually unusable. Proposals to address political speech on social media need to protect users from being deplatformed for their political beliefs while also preserving platforms’ ability to deplatform users who engage in harmful or illegal behavior.

Public Funding

An alternative technical reform to address political speech on social media would involve the government providing funding for companies to improve their algorithms. This proposal is another response to claims that social media platforms’ algorithms, either intentionally to keep users hooked on a platform or unintentionally as a byproduct of how the algorithms work, promote objectionable content such as misinformation, extremist content, and conspiracy theories.

Social media algorithms are designed to maximize user engagement by prioritizing content that each user is likely to find entertaining, interesting, or useful. Algorithms use many different factors to rank content, including the content a user has engaged with in the past, searches the user has made, content similar users have engaged with, the amount of time the user spends viewing different forms of content, and who the user follows or frequently engages with on the platform. [51]

If an algorithm judges that a user has or is likely to have an interest in controversial political content, it may rank such content high on that user’s feed. This could lead to the user stumbling upon misinformation, conspiracy theories, or other content that could potentially lead the user down a rabbit hole of extremist content and even radicalization.

Although some critics accuse social media companies of purposefully designing their algorithms to radicalize users, the more likely explanation is that radicalization is a flaw in the way algorithms work to promote engaging content. To fix this flaw, the government could provide funding for social media companies to study how their algorithms end up promoting extremist content and either improve their algorithms or create better algorithms that do not promote this content.

However, many social media critics would oppose public funding going to social media companies, particularly the largest social media companies that have come under the most scrutiny for their handling of political speech. There is a perception that these companies have enough resources to fix all the flaws with their algorithms and choose not to do so in order to continue profiting off of radical content. Public funding going to these companies that critics believe are already too large and too profitable in order to fix problems the companies could afford to fix on their own would be highly controversial.

In addition, a lack of funding is not the main problem social media companies face when it comes to political content. A larger problem is the lack of consensus on how social media should handle political speech. Social media companies cannot create algorithms that do not promote extremist content, misinformation, or conspiracy theories if there is no consensus on what qualifies as extremist content, misinformation, and conspiracy theories. These are highly politicized terms, and until there is a consensus, social media companies risk just as much or more backlash for changing their algorithms.

Structural Changes

The fourth category of proposals would involve extensive government intervention to change the way social media operates on a structural level. This includes breaking up large social media companies, regulating them as “common carriers,” nationalizing them, or creating a government-run social media platform. For the most part, these proposals are an overreaction to the problems that exist in social media, are unlikely to effectively solve those problems, and could introduce new problems for consumers and businesses.

The first structural change to address political speech on social media would involve breaking up the social media companies that host the majority of online speech. The argument for this approach is similar to many other proposals: that a select few companies have too much control over online speech and political discourse. These companies make decisions about what content is or is not permitted on their platforms as well as how content is promoted.

Critics argue that social media companies’ power over the speech on their platforms is a threat to democracy. They claim that social media has exacerbated political polarization by creating echo chambers, powered both by algorithms that only show users content similar to what they have engaged with in the past and by the ease with which users can seek out people who agree with them and opinions that affirm their own. They also blame social media for the spread of misinformation and online attacks against marginalized groups. Finally, critics point out that social media is vulnerable to abuse by highly coordinated actors seeking to spread disinformation and influence election outcomes. [52]

Some critics even accuse social media companies themselves of interfering with election outcomes. During the 2020 U.S. presidential election, Twitter and Facebook restricted the spread of a New York Post article alleging that Hunter Biden, son of then-candidate Joe Biden, had connections to China and Ukraine. Some Republican lawmakers accused the platforms of interfering with the election and used the platforms’ actions as proof of their alleged bias against conservatives. [53]

Proponents of breaking up large social media companies would rather see several smaller social media companies that all compete with each other and have different user bases and content moderation practices. Each of these smaller companies would have power over a smaller portion of online speech, and it would be easier for users who disagree with one platform’s policies to move to a different platform.

However, breaking up the companies that currently dominate social media is no guarantee that other companies won’t take their place and become equally or more dominant. Network effects are particularly strong in social media: The value of a social media platform increases with its user base. [54] Users want to be on the same platform as their family, friends, and colleagues are.

Additionally, large firms are not inherently problematic or anticompetitive. In fact, there is a great deal of competition in social media, with smaller companies such as Reddit, Pinterest, Snapchat, and Tumblr able to coexist alongside Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, and newer competitors such as TikTok able to capture a large, thriving user base over a relatively short span of time with new features that appeal to users. The goal of antitrust should be to promote consumer welfare and innovation, not simply to break up any firm that meets an arbitrary size-based threshold. [55]

When it comes to content moderation, large companies have many advantages over smaller ones. These larger companies have more resources to devote to content moderation, including hiring human moderators who can make more accurate and nuanced decisions than algorithms can. They can also continue to innovate and experiment with new ways to moderate content, such as Twitter’s Birdwatch program.

Finally, there is no guarantee that smaller companies would be any less vulnerable to manipulation or that having more small social media platforms would lead to less political polarization. In fact, the opposite may be true. Because of their larger user bases, platforms such as Facebook and Twitter have plenty of users across the political spectrum. But smaller platforms that cater to specific groups or ideologies could create insulated online communities, such as Parler’s largely conservative user base. This would strengthen polarization, not weaken it.

The economic arguments behind breaking up large social media companies are deeply flawed and based in an approach to antitrust that deprioritizes innovation and consumer welfare. Dividing up users among a larger variety of smaller platforms would only make it more difficult to come to a consensus on how to address political speech on social media.

Common Carrier Regulation

A second structural change would impose common carrier regulations on major social media companies. This would require social media platforms to “carry” all legal speech. They could no longer remove harmful-but-legal content or deplatform individuals who break the platform’s terms of service.

The term “common carrier” emerged in the context of transportation and was later applied to telecommunications. [56] When a transportation service such as a railroad or public bus, or a telecommunications service such as a telephone or broadband provider, makes its service available to the general public for a fee, as opposed to offering the services on a contract basis with specific customers under specific circumstances, it is classified as a common carrier. [57] Telecommunications common carriers are subject to regulations laid out in the Communications Act of 1934 (and amended in 1996), including nondiscrimination requirements that make it unlawful for these companies to deny their services to certain customers. [58]

Proponents of regulating major social media companies as common carriers argue that these companies currently have too much power and control over political discourse, which threatens free speech. [59] They can freely remove posts and ban users, including world leaders, for violating their terms of service. [60] With so much of modern discourse occurring online, particularly on a few key platforms, the decision of one or a few companies can have an outsized impact on the overall political landscape, even influencing election outcomes.

By this reasoning, proponents argue that it is in the public and national interests to regulate social media companies as common carriers. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has argued that such a law would not violate the First Amendment. [61] One such proposal currently facing Congress is S. 1384, the 21st Century Foundation for the Right to Express and Engage in (FREE) Speech Act, which would regulate social media platforms with more than 100 million users as common carriers. [62] Texas and Florida have both passed laws to treat social media platforms like common carriers, although these laws have faced legal challenges. [63]

Even if imposing common carrier regulation on major social media companies would pass First Amendment scrutiny, doing so would ruin social media for the majority of its users. Many of the major social media platforms’ terms of service bar content that is not illegal under U.S. law but that the platforms have determined is detrimental to their users. As common carriers, platforms would no longer be permitted to remove this content or ban users for posting it, which would lead to a flood of harmful and controversial content, including hate speech, violence, sexual content, and spam. Rather than improving social media for users, common carrier regulations would only make social media a worse environment overall.

Nationalization

Arguably the most extreme structural change the government could enact would be to nationalize the largest social media companies. This would involve the federal government taking ownership or control over companies that are currently owned by shareholders.

Nationalization frequently occurs in developing countries as a means of taking control of foreign-owned assets and businesses in critical industries such as oil, mining, and infrastructure. [64] However, developed countries such as the United States have a history of nationalizing companies as well, albeit usually temporarily. For instance, the U.S. government nationalized certain companies that were critical to the war effort during World War I and II, including railroads, telegraph lines, coal mines, and firearms manufacturers. It has also nationalized banks and other companies during times of financial crisis; during the Great Recession, the U.S. government temporarily nationalized General Motors. [65]

Two exceptions to the United States’ temporary nationalizations are Amtrak and the airline security industry. The U.S. government created Amtrak in the Congressional Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970, consolidating 20 privately-owned passenger railroads that were struggling as automobiles overtook trains as Americans’ preferred mode of transportation. [66] The U.S. government later created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) on November 19, 2001, in the Aviation and Transportation Security Act as a response to the September 11 terrorist attacks. [67]

Proponents of nationalizing major social media companies echo many of the same arguments as those of proponents of imposing common carrier regulations on these companies. They argue that so much of modern discourse takes place on these companies’ platforms, and the platforms have become so integral to the average American’s daily life, that they should be classified as a public good. [68] They argue that these companies are monopolies that currently have too much power over Americans’ speech, including the power to censor or deplatform individuals for their political beliefs. [69]

If the government controlled social media, it would be bound by the First Amendment and could not restrict legal forms of speech. And even if the takeover were temporary, proponents argue that the government could restore public trust in social media before once again privatizing those social media companies. [70]

History demonstrates that the U.S. government only nationalizes companies under extreme circumstances (usually involving national security concerns) and these nationalizations are almost always temporary. Even proponents of nationalizing the largest social media companies acknowledge that this outcome is unlikely. [71]

Social media does not pose a significant national security risk, and the multitude of platforms and ascent of new popular platforms such as TikTok suggest that the largest social media companies are not natural monopolies. The government is also unlikely to restore public trust in social media companies, given that the American public’s trust in its government has been on the decline for most of the Internet era. [72]

Social media also relies heavily on innovation and efficiency—two areas where governments tend to lack. In the context of political speech, these companies are constantly improving their moderation algorithms to detect and remove harmful content. And because the government is constrained by the First Amendment, while social media companies are not, nationalizing social media would also result in harmful-but-legal content overwhelming the Internet. Once again, this would make social media worse, not better.

Government-Run Social Media Platform

Instead of nationalizing the largest social media companies, the government could instead create its own social media platform, similar to public broadcasting stations such as National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). Rather than replacing existing platforms, this public-funded platform would compete with Facebook, Twitter, and others and provide users with an alternative to those platforms.

The argument for a government-run social media platform is similar to the argument for nationalizing social media. The government is bound by the First Amendment and cannot censor legal forms of speech or punish individuals for their protected speech, unlike private companies, which are free to set their own rules regarding acceptable content on their platforms.

Creating a separate, government-run social media platform would have fewer downsides than would nationalizing the largest social media companies, but its success would depend on both the government’s ability to create and operate—and the public’s willingness to use—a new, public-funded social media platform.

In the case of NPR, the organization has been successful despite a decrease in radio listenership by taking advantage of new mediums, including podcasts, live streams, and smart speakers. When radio listenership declined 22 percent during the COVID-19 pandemic as fewer people were commuting to work, the total number of people consuming NPR’s content in some form actually increased by 10 percent. [73] This demonstrates that public-funded organizations are capable of modernizing and innovating in order to capture an audience.

However, radio and social media pose very different challenges for new entrants to the market, in part due to network effects. Although these effects don’t prevent new entrants from succeeding, they do make such success more difficult to achieve. New social media platforms thrive by taking a different approach and offering new features users enjoy—for example, TikTok’s ease of use, highly customized feed, and focus on short-form video content have helped the app attract its user base. [74]

The free speech angle of a government-run social media platform could be enough to attract users, as has been the case with Parler, which grew exponentially during the 2020 U.S. presidential election, gaining over 7,000 users per minute that November. [75] However, this approach also comes with significant downsides. Plenty of harmful or controversial content is protected speech, meaning a government-run social media platform will be overrun with this content compared with other platforms. Many people would not want to use such a platform, and the platform would likely attract bad actors who want to post and spread harmful content. Additionally, people with low trust in the government may not want to give a government-run social media platform their personal information.

Because of these disadvantages, a government-run platform would find it difficult to compete with established platforms. It also would not affect the way social media companies moderate content; the debate around political speech on existing platforms would remain unsolved.

Commissions, Boards , and Councils

The final set of proposals focus on building a consensus on what the problems are with the current state of online political speech and creating best practices for dealing with those problems that balance concerns over freedom of speech and harmful content. This would take place at either the company, national, or international level, each of which would come with its own benefits and limitations.

Building a consensus on what the problem is and how to solve it is a necessary step to addressing political speech on social media. Proposed solutions that only address claims that social media companies remove too much content or don’t remove enough content would only satisfy one side or the other. It may be impossible to satisfy all social media’s critics, but a commission representing various interests would come closest to achieving a workable compromise.

Company Oversight Boards

Company oversight boards would make decisions about individual social media companies’ content moderation policies and decisions. The goal of these boards would be to create external checks and balances on large social media companies that otherwise have a significant amount of control over users’ speech. In order for these boards to have some legitimacy, they would need to operate independently from the companies they are associated with and their decisions would need to be binding.

A blueprint for other social media oversight boards, Facebook’s Oversight Board It was conceptualized in 2018 and began operations in 2020. [76] It consists of between 11 and 40 members serving a maximum of three three-year terms. Users who have exhausted their appeals of one of Facebook’s content moderation decisions can appeal that decision to the board, and Facebook can also submit its own decisions for review. The board has the power to request information from Facebook, interpret Facebook’s Community Standards, and instruct Facebook to allow or remove content or uphold or reverse an enforcement action. [77]

The Oversight Board’s May 5, 2021, decision regarding Facebook banning former president Trump from its platform gained media attention and scrutiny. [78] The board upheld Facebook’s ban but criticized Facebook for indefinitely suspending Trump rather than taking one of its typical enforcement actions of removing offending content or suspending an account for a specified length of time, rather than permanently banning Trump’s account. [79]

Critics of Facebook’s Oversight Board have called into question the board’s efficacy given the limited number and types of cases it can hear. [80] Despite efforts to ensure the Oversight Board’s independence, it is still associated with Facebook, one of the primary targets of the recent techlash. Other companies seeking to emulate Facebook’s approach would likely encounter similar criticism and public doubt about its credibility.

Additionally, not every company has the resources Facebook does, making the establishment of an independent and well-funded external company board unfeasible. Facebook’s Oversight Board is a step in the right direction toward increased transparency and accountability, but it is not a model most companies will be able to implement and is unlikely to solve the debate over political speech on social media.

Company Advisory Councils

Company advisory councils provide nonbinding feedback and expertise about individual social media companies’ content moderation policies and decisions. For example, the short-video-sharing social media company TikTok has set up a number of advisory councils for different regions, such as the United States, Europe, and Brazil. [81] Similarly, the photo messaging social media company Snap operates an advisory board to solicit feedback from experts across its global community. [82] Advisory councils provide an opportunity for companies to seek regular outside input about their content moderation decisions and help bring in different stakeholders’ perspectives.

However, companies are not bound by any of the recommendations given by their advisory councils, and the value and impact of any feedback depends on the composition of the council and the willingness of a company to engage with that feedback. Moreover, companies typically choose the members of their advisory councils, so stakeholders that do not have a seat at the table may not have their interests sufficiently represented. As a result, advisory councils may help individual companies better solicit feedback from outside stakeholders, but they will likely not do enough to impact the perceived public legitimacy of controversial content moderation decisions or set broader industry norms and practices.

National Commission

Whereas company oversight boards such as Facebook’s Oversight Board only oversee the content moderation policies and decisions of one company, a national commission would make recommendations for all social media companies that operate in the United States.

Congress would create this commission and the speaker and ranking member of the House of Representatives would select the commission’s members to ensure bipartisan representation. Membership could include experts and thought leaders from civil society, academia, social media, and news media. Once formed, the commission would create a set of best practices for social media companies to follow regarding controversial political speech.

These best practices should remain broad and flexible enough to apply to a multitude of scenarios and adapt to new circumstances. For example, guidelines on misinformation should focus on best practices for identifying and removing misinformation rather than outlining specifically which beliefs or opinions qualify as misinformation.

Because government would be involved in creating and funding this commission, the commission could not legally require companies to follow its guidelines, as this would be a violation of the First Amendment. Government cannot instruct companies on what speech is or is not appropriate or punish companies or individuals for their speech. But companies that do follow the commission’s guidelines could point to this as an example of their good moderation practices.

There is evidence that some companies would find this guidance useful. In February 2020, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg expressed that he would welcome government guidance or regulation regarding harmful content on social media, stating that it would “[create] trust and better governance of the Internet and will benefit everyone, including [Facebook] over the long term.” [83] Companies such as Facebook that have been at the center of the techlash would not only have a way to prove that they are following best practices for content moderation, but there would also be someone else to “blame” for content moderation failures.

The primary benefit of a national commission is it requires reaching a consensus or compromise on important issues related to online political speech. Although this would be a difficult process given current ideological divides, it is a necessary first step. Additionally, while proponents of government regulation may be skeptical of voluntary guidelines, this approach sidesteps many of the First Amendment concerns that come with regulation.

However, although a national commission would be a step in the right direction toward consensus-building and the creation of best practices for content moderation, the debate over online speech is international. Companies that adhere to a national commission’s guidelines would still likely face criticism overseas from other governments that would not be involved in the process of setting the guidelines and may have different ideas about what good moderation practices look like.

Multistakeholder Forum

The final proposed solution would involve creating an international forum for stakeholders to develop voluntary recommendations for global social media companies based on democratic, rule-of-law principles. This would solve the problem of companies needing to follow many different rules or guidelines in different countries. However, it would require even more effort than creating a national commission would, and the process of reaching a consensus or compromise would be even more difficult.

There are examples of nonprofit organizations that set standards for the Internet, including the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Internet Society (ISOC), and the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Each of these organizations sets global standards for how the Internet operates: ICANN manages Internet Protocol addresses and domain names, ISOC sets norms for routing security and creates tools and recommendations for improving security and access, and W3C develops a variety of protocols and guidelines. [84]

An international forum on content moderation would bring together experts and thought leaders from business, government, and civil society to create recommendations based on democratic standards of free speech and harm reduction. Funding could come from participating governments and companies, similar to how W3C charges membership dues as well as receives grants and takes donations. [85]

The guidelines produced by the international forum would be voluntary. Companies could choose to commit to following the guidelines, but would not be legally required to do so. Once again, this could elicit skepticism from proponents of greater government regulation of social media companies, but would avoid the free speech implications of governments requiring companies to moderate speech in a certain way.

Additionally, consensus-building on an international scale would be even more difficult than on a national level. An international forum would have to develop standards that satisfy democratic countries around the world, many of which have taken radically different approaches to regulating social media companies.

It is important to note that countries will continue to have different standards about where to draw the line on lawful content. Germany, for example, has far stricter hate speech laws than does the United States. Countries would still make their own decisions about the legality of content, but the international forum could provide guidance on content that is otherwise lawful globally or only in certain jurisdictions. It could also provide standardized definitions of terms to promote interoperability between different national laws when harmonization is not possible or desired.

There is some momentum behind an international approach to social media. The U.S.-EU Trade and Technology Council (TTC), established to foster transatlantic cooperation and promote trade and technology policies based on shared democratic values, met for the first time on September 29, 2021. Moving forward, the TTC’s Working Group on Data Governance and Technology Platforms will focus on challenges related to online platform regulation such as harmful and illegal content, algorithms, transparency, and intermediary liability. In a joint statement, the TTC announced the United States and European Union’s “shared interest in using voluntary and multistakeholder initiatives to complement regulatory approaches” in some of these areas. [86]

Moreover, the United States recently joined dozens of countries in signing on to the “Declaration for the Future of the Internet,” which affirms their commitments to taking actions to “reduce illegal and harmful content and activities online” in ways that are “consistent with international human rights law, including the right to freedom of expression while encouraging diversity of opinion, and pluralism without fear of censorship, harassment, or intimidation.” [87] In addition, these countries have pledged to take actions to promote these principle in “multilateral and multistakeholder fora,” so the United States and others can build on this commitment to address political speech online.

Recommendations

There are many options available to policymakers; however, most of the proposed reforms will be unlikely to resolve certain core disputes. For example, there are limits to what social media companies can do on their own because policymakers and the public often do not trust that these companies are acting in the public interest or do not believe that these content moderation decisions should be made by the private sector. And there are limits to what policymakers can achieve on their own, not only because there are clear political disagreements over what path they should take, but also because legislative restrictions on social media raise free speech concerns. Finally, a number of the proposed structural and technical changes to social media not only would likely fail to resolve these questions, but they would also likely make things worse, both for content moderation and other issues impacting consumers.

Therefore, the best course of action does not shift the burden of resolving these problems entirely on industry or government, but instead brings together various stakeholders around solutions that foster trust, increase transparency, and mitigate threats.

In addition, it should create a role for building more consensus and trust so that recommendations are seen as legitimate by creating an active role for civil society.

To that end, there are three key steps the U.S. government should take: (1) establish an international multistakeholder forum to develop voluntary, consensus-based guidelines for content moderation; (2) support social media platforms’ efforts to combat state-sponsored harmful content; and (3) establish social media platform transparency requirements.

First, and most importantly, the United States should take the lead in establishing a multistakeholder forum—described in this report as the International Forum on Content Moderation (IFCM)—to develop a set of voluntary, consensus-based guidelines for social media companies to follow when moderating online political speech. These guidelines should create common definitions of different types of harmful content and establish best practices for classifying and responding to such content based on evidenced-based research. For example, these guidelines should specify the types of information social media platforms should provide to users about content that is removed, labeled, de-monetized, or otherwise restricted on their platform, as well as the type of redress and appeals mechanisms they should put in place to allow users to appeal decisions. Similarly, these guidelines should specify recommended oversight mechanisms to ensure fair and equitable enforcement of rules and offer details on what types of special accounts platforms should recognize, such as for elected officials, and how to make those determinations. Finally, these guidelines should create a process for designating trusted flaggers—third parties that reliably classify harmful content—social media platforms can use to improve their content moderation.

The goal of IFCM would not be to create one-size-fits-all recommendations about specific types of content that should be allowed or not allowed on all platforms, since these decisions may rightly vary by platform. Instead, the goal would be to develop consensus-based content moderation processes social media platforms can use to address controversial content moderation questions and improve the legitimacy of their content moderation practices. These content moderation processes should respect transparency, accountability, and due process and balance goals such as free speech with reducing consumer harm.

To launch IFCM, the United States should provide initial funding in the form of a 10-year grant. This funding could go to establish a new nonprofit organization or build a new capability in an existing multistakeholder institution. IFCM’s governing body would consist of individuals from industry, government, and civil society—with participants limited to those who are from members of the G7 to ensure the initiative reflects shared democratic values. IFCM would provide a forum for stakeholders to share their expertise and experiences to create consensus-based guidelines. Consensus-based processes have been a cornerstone of multistakeholder Internet governance and have allowed diverse groups to identify solutions all participants find beneficial. [88] Working through a multistakeholder process helps build trust and promotes consensus-building, which will be necessary to create guidelines others will be willing to adhere to.

The Biden administration has shown some appetite for greater U.S. leadership in Internet policy. For example, it has created the Declaration for the Future of the Internet as well as the TTC to foster closer cooperation with its allies on digital policy. [89] It has also, under the leadership of Secretary Blinken, established the new Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy within the State Department. [90] Creating IFCM would be a way to create an international forum among nations with shared democratic values to foster closer multistakeholder collaboration on digital content moderation issues, such as misinformation, hate speech, and more. While the initial focus of IFCM should be on social media, the purpose of creating an initial 10-year grant is it could later tackle additional online content moderation questions as they arise, such as how online payment platforms, app stores, or online advertising networks should respond to controversial speech, or how these issues should be addressed in emerging web3 and metaverse platforms. IFCM could also expand to include participants from additional democratic nations with unanimous approval from the initial members.

Second, the U.S. government should provide more support to social media platforms to assist in their efforts to respond to state-sponsored harmful content, such as Russian disinformation or Chinese bots. Specifically, the U.S. government should provide additional research grants for academics studying these issues to partner with social media platforms to improve methods for identifying and responding to the most especially egregious forms of harmful or illegal content. In addition, the U.S. government should develop better information sharing capabilities, both between government and industry as well as between social media companies, about state-sponsored threats related to harmful content. Better coordination and information sharing could help social media platforms more quickly and effectively respond to foreign misinformation and disinformation campaigns.

Third, Congress should pass legislation setting transparency requirements for content moderation decisions of social media platforms. Congress should require social media platforms to clearly describe what content and behavior is allowed and not allowed, how they enforce these rules, and how users can appeal moderation decisions. Additionally, the law should require platforms to enforce their rules consistently and create an appeals process for content moderation decisions wherever one does not already exist. To increase transparency surrounding content moderation, platforms should release publicly accessible annual reports, including data on how many and what types of rule-breaking content and behavior a company removed from the platform, how many of those decisions were appealed by users, and how many of those appeals were successful. Importantly, any congressional legislation should not include interoperability or nondiscrimination requirements for social media platforms because such requirements would impair their ability to address harmful content, including from foreign adversaries, as many former intelligence and defense officials have warned. [91]

While developing solutions to improve content moderation processes will not be easy, given the importance of these platforms for communication in today’s digital society, it should be a high priority for policymakers. Rather than continue down the path of blaming social media companies for problems they are unable to resolve on their own, or pursuing changes that would likely leave consumers worse off without addressing the real problems, policymakers should seize the opportunity to strike out on a new way forward that works in partnership with all stakeholders to develop consensus, trust, and solutions.

About the Authors

Ashley Johnson (@ashleyjnsn) is a senior policy analyst at ITIF. She researches and writes about Internet policy issues such as privacy, security, and platform regulation. She was previously at Software.org: the BSA Foundation, and holds a master’s degree in security policy from The George Washington University and a bachelor’s degree in sociology from Brigham Young University.

Daniel Castro (@castrotech) is vice president at ITIF and director of its Center for Data Innovation. He writes and speaks on a variety of issues related to information technology and Internet policy, including privacy, security, intellectual property, Internet governance, e-government, and accessibility for people with disabilities.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) is an independent, nonprofit, nonpartisan research and educational institute focusing on the intersection of technological innovation and public policy. Recognized by its peers in the think tank community as the global center of excellence for science and technology policy, ITIF’s mission is to formulate and promote policy solutions that accelerate innovation and boost productivity to spur growth, opportunity, and progress. For more information, visit us at itif.org .

[1] .     Sara Fischer and Ashley Gold, “All the platforms that have banned or restricted Trump so far,” Axios , January 11, 2021, https://www.axios.com/platforms-social-media-ban-restrict-trump-d9e44f3c-8366-4ba9-a8a1-7f3114f920f1.html .

[2] .     Bill Gates, Business @ the Speed of Thought: Succeeding in the Digital Economy (Grand Central Publishing, March 1, 1999).

[3] .     “Most popular social networks worldwide as of January 2022, ranked by number of monthly active users,” Statistica, 2022, https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/ .

[4] .     “Most popular mobile social networking apps in the United States as of September 2019, by monthly users,” Statistica, 2022, https://www.statista.com/statistics/248074/most-popular-us-social-networking-apps-ranked-by-audience/ .

[5] .     “Social Media Use in 2021,” Pew Research Center, April 7, 2021, https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-media-use-in-2021/ .

[6] .     Elliott Schrage, “Hard Questions: Russian Ads Delivered to Congress,” Facebook Newsroom , October 2, 2017, https://about.fb.com/news/2017/10/hard-questions-russian-ads-delivered-to-congress/ .

[7] .     “Insights To Go: Daily Active Users,” Facebook, accessed September 7, 2020, https://www.facebook.com/iq/insights-to-go/1820m-facebook-daily-active-users-were-1820m-on-average-for-september/ ; Hamza Shaban, “Twitter reveals its daily active user numbers for the first time,” The Washington Post , February 7, 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/02/07/twitter-reveals-its-daily-active-user-numbers-first-time/ .

[8] .     Jacob Kastrenakes, “Reddit reveals daily active user count for the first time: 52 million,” The Verge , December 1, 2020, https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/1/21754984/reddit-dau-daily-users-revealed ; N. Lee, “Snapchat just announced its largest user growth in years,” Engadget, July 22, 2021, https://www.engadget.com/snapchat-earnings-210932638.html ; Alex Sherman, “TikTok reveals detailed user numbers for the first time,” CNBC, August 24, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/24/tiktok-reveals-us-global-user-growth-numbers-for-first-time.html .

[9] .     Jacob Kastrenakes, “Reddit reveals daily active user count for the first time: 52 million”;. Lee, “Snapchat just announced its largest user growth in years”; Sherman, “TikTok reveals detailed user numbers for the first time.”

[10] .   Ashley Johnson, “The U.S. Government Should Take the Lead in Providing Guidance on How to Moderate Social Media Content From the Taliban” (ITIF, September 3, 2021), https://itif.org/publications/2021/09/03/us-government-should-provide-guidance-moderate-Taliban-social-media .

[11] .   “Parler returns to Apple App Store with some content excluded,” The Verge , May 17, 2021, https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/17/22440005/parler-apple-app-store-return-amazon-google-capitol .

[12] .   “Google lets the Parler app back into the Play Store,” TechCrunch , September 2, 2022, https://techcrunch.com/2022/09/02/parler-google-play-store-return/ .

[13] .   Sara Fischer, “Truth Social's Google Play Store holdup,” Axios , August 30, 2022, https://www.axios.com/2022/08/30/trump-truth-social-google-android-moderation .

[14] .   Bennett Clifford, “Moderating Extremism: The State Of Online Terrorist Content Removal Policy In The United States,” GW Program on Extremism, December 2021, https://extremism.gwu.edu/reports .

[15] .   ”Episode 5: How Section 230 Promotes Competition, With Jessica Ashooh,” Ellysse and Ashley Break the Internet: The Ins and Outs of the Section 230 Debate , https://itif.org/podcast-how-section-230-promotes-competition-jessica-ashooh ;      Lee, “Snapchat just announced its largest user growth in years”; Sherman, “TikTok reveals detailed user numbers for the first time.”

[16] .   Bharath Ganesh and Jonathan Bright, “Countering Extremists on Social Media: Challenges for Strategic Communication and Content Moderation,” Policy and Internet , March 16, 2020, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/poi3.236 .

[17] .   Adam Taylor, “Facebook’s battle with errant world leaders has only just begun,” The Washington Post , May 6, 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/05/06/facebook-world-leaders/ .

[18] .   “Germany: Flawed Social Media Law,” Human Rights Watch, published February 14, 2018, https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/02/14/germany-flawed-social-media-law .

[19] .   Ashley Johnson and Daniel Castro, “Proposals to Reform Section 230” (ITIF, February 22, 2021), https://itif.org/publications/2021/02/22/proposals-reform-section-230 .

[20] .   “Wikipedia: About,” Wikipedia, accessed September 17, 2021, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About .

[21] .   “Wikipedia: Policies and guidelines,” Wikipedia, accessed September 17, 2021, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Policies_and_guidelines .

[22] .   “Wikipedia Isn’t Officially a Social Network. But the Harassment Can Get Ugly.” New York Times , April 8, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/08/us/wikipedia-harassment-wikimedia-foundation.html .

[23] .   “What’s a moderator?” Reddit, n.d. https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/204533859-What-s-a-moderator- .

[24] .   Keith Coleman, “Introducing Birdwatch, a community-based approach to misinformation,” Twitter Blog, January 25, 2021, https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/product/2021/introducing-birdwatch-a-community-based-approach-to-misinformation .

[25] .   “Donald Trump’s Wikipedia Entry Is a War Zone,” Slate , May 28, 2019, https://slate.com/technology/2019/05/donald-trump-wikipedia-page.html .

[26] .   “Film Ratings,” Motion Picture Association of America, accessed September 8, 2021, https://www.motionpictures.org/film-ratings/ .

[27] .   “ABA Timeline,” American Bar Association, accessed September 8, 2021, https://www.americanbar.org/about_the_aba/timeline/ .

[28] .   Caitlin Dewey, “Absolutely everything you need to know to understand 4chan, the Internet’s own bogeyman,” The Washington Post , September 25, 2014, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/09/25/absolutely-everything-you-need-to-know-to-understand-4chan-the-internets-own-bogeyman/ .

[29] .   Julia Carrie Wong, “8chan: the far-right website linked to the rise in hate crimes,” The Guardian , August 4, 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/aug/04/mass-shootings-el-paso-texas-dayton-ohio-8chan-far-right-website .

[30] .   Robert D. Atkinson et al., “A Policymaker’s Guide to the ‘Techlash’—What It Is and Why It’s a Threat to Growth and Progress” (ITIF, October 2019), https://itif.org/sites/default/files/2019-policymakers-guide-techlash.pdf .

[31] .   Taylor Lorenz, “How the Biden administration let right-wing attacks derail its disinformation efforts” Washington Post , May 18, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/18/disinformation-board-dhs-nina-jankowicz/ .

[32] .   “S.797 - PACT Act,” Congress.gov, accessed September 21, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/797 .

[33] .   Ashley Johnson, “PACT Act Has Good Intentions But Flawed Execution” (ITIF, March 17, 2021), https://itif.org/publications/2021/03/17/pact-act-has-good-intentions-flawed-execution-says-itif .

[34] .   “Governor Ron DeSantis, Florida House Speaker Chris Sprowls and Senate President Wilton Simpson Highlight Proposed Legislation to Increase Technology Transparency in Florida,” Governor Ron DeSantis, published February 2, 2021, https://flgov.com/2021/02/02/governor-ron-desantis-florida-house-speaker-chris-sprowls-and-senate-president-wilton-simpson-highlight-proposed-legislation-to-increase-technology-transparency-in-florida/ .

[35] .   Mark MacCarthy, “An ‘Equal Time’ Rule for Social Media,” Forbes , January 21, 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/washingtonbytes/2020/01/21/an-equal-time-rule-for-social-media/ .

[36] .   Shannon K. McCraw, “Equal Time Rule,” The First Amendment Encyclopedia , 2009, https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/949/equal-time-rule .

[37] .   Grace Manthey, “Presidential campaigns set new records for social media ad spending,” ABC7, October 29, 2020, https://abc7.com/presidential-race-campaign-spending-trump-political-ads-biden/7452228/ .

[38] .   Paul M. Barrett and J. Grant Sims, “False Accusation: The Unfounded Claim that Social Media Companies Censor Conservatives” (NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights, February 2021), https://www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/faculty-research/false-accusation-unfounded-claim-social-media-companies-censor-conservatives .  

[39] .   Dave Lee, “The tactics of a Russian troll farm,” BBC, February 16, 2018, https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43093390 .

[40] .   David L. Hudson, Jr., “In the Age of Social Media, Expand the Reach of the First Amendment,” American Bar Association, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/the-ongoing-challenge-to-define-free-speech/in-the-age-of-socia-media-first-amendment/ .

[41] .   Brett M. Pinkus, “The Limits of Free Speech in Social Media,” Accessible Law , April 26, 2021, https://accessiblelaw.untdallas.edu/limits-free-speech-social-media .

[42] .   Rachel Lerman, “Facebook says it has taken down 7 million posts for spreading coronavirus misinformation,” The Washington Post , August 11, 2020.

[43] .   47 U.S.C. § 230 (1996).

[44] .   “H.R.8922 - Break Up Big Tech Act of 2020,” Congress.gov, accessed September 13, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/8922 .

[45] .   “H.R.492 - Biased Algorithm Deterrence Act of 2019,” Congress.gov, accessed September 13, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/492 ; “H.R.8515 - Don’t Push My Buttons Act,” Congress.gov, accessed September 13, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/8515 .

[46] .   “S.4337 - BAD ADS Act,” Congress.gov, accessed September 13, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/4337 .

[47] .   Matt Stoller, “How to Prevent the Next Social Media-Driven Attack on Democracy—and Avoid a Big Tech Censorship Regime” (American Economic Liberties Project, February 2021), https://www.economicliberties.us/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Corporate-Power-Quick-Takes_4.pdf .

[48] .   Bennett Cyphers and Danny O’Brien, “Facing Facebook: Data Portability and Interoperability Are Anti-Monopoly Medicine,” Electronic Frontier Foundation, July 24, 2018, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/07/facing-facebook-data-portability-and-interoperability-are-anti-monopoly-medicine .

[49] .   “H.R.3849 - ACCESS Act of 2021,” Congress.gov, accessed September 21, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3849 .

[50] .   Daniel Castro, “If Congress Moves Forward with Social Media ‘Interoperability Requirements,’ Deplatforming Users Will Be A Thing of the Past” (ITIF, January 11, 2021), https://itif.org/publications/2021/01/11/if-congress-moves-forward-social-media-interoperability-requirements .

[51] .   Sang Ah Kim, “Social Media Algorithms: Why You See What You See,” Georgetown Law Technology Review 2, no. 1 (2017): 147–154, https://perma.cc/J3LD-DX2H .

[52] .   Tom Glaisyer, “Is Social Media a Threat to Democracy?” Democracy Fund, October 4, 2017, https://democracyfund.org/idea/is-social-media-a-threat-to-democracy/ .

[53] .   Jemima McEvoy, “GOP Calls Social Media Censorship Of Hunter Biden Story ‘Attempt To Rig An Election,’” Forbes , October 15, 2021, https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2020/10/15/gop-calls-social-media-censorship-of-hunter-biden-story-attempt-to-rig-an-election/ .

[54] .   Tim Stobierski, “What Are Network Effects?” Harvard Business School Online, November 12, 2020, https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/what-are-network-effects .

[55] .   Robert D. Atkinson, “How Progressives Have Spun Dubious Theories and Faulty Research Into a Harmful New Antitrust Debate” (ITIF, March 2021), https://itif.org/sites/default/files/2021-monopoly-myths-summary-report.pdf .

[56] .   Barbara A. Cherry, “Origins of Common Carrier Liability Rules and Practices,” in The Crisis in Telecommunications Carrier Liability 32 (Boston: Springer, 1999), 7–28, https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4615-4993-2_2 .

[57] .   “Common Carrier,” Legal Information Institute, accessed September 14, 2021, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/common_carrier .

[58] .   47 U.S.C. § 202 (1996).

[59] .   Tunku Varadarajan, “The ‘Common Carrier’ Solution to Social-Media Censorship,” The Wall Street Journal , January 15, 2021, https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-common-carrier-solution-to-social-media-censorship-11610732343 .

[60] .   Davey Alba, Ella Koeze, and Jacob Silver, “What Happened When Trump Was Banned on Social Media,” The New York Times , June 7, 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/06/07/technology/trump-social-media-ban.html .

[61] .   Mark MacCarthy, “Justice Thomas sends a message on social media regulation,” Brookings, April 9, 2021, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2021/04/09/justice-thomas-sends-a-message-on-social-media-regulation/ .

[62] .   “S.1384 - 21st Century FREE Speech Act,” Congress.gov, accessed September 14, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1384 .

[63] .   Brian Fung, “Are social media platforms like railroads? The future of Facebook and Twitter could depend on the answer,” CNN, June 8, 2022. https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/08/tech/common-carriage-social-media/index.html .

[64] .   Gerry Everding, “Chavez’s nationalization of foreign-owned industries is part of global pattern,” Washington University in St. Louis, February 9, 2007, https://source.wustl.edu/2007/02/chavez-nationalization-of-foreignowned-industries-is-part-of-global-pattern/ .

[65] .   The Associated Press, “A History Of Corporate Nationalization,” CBS News, June 2, 2009, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-history-of-corporate-nationalization/ .

[66] .   Graham Rapier, “The rise and fall of Amtrak, which has been losing money since 1971,” Business Insider , May 20, 2019, https://www.businessinsider.com/history-of-amtrak-train-railroad-photos-2019-5 .

[67] .   NMAH, “September 11 and the Transportation Security Administration,” National Museum of American History, September 1, 2011, https://americanhistory.si.edu/blog/2011/09/september-11-and-the-transportation-security-administration.html .

[68] .   Philip N. Howard, “Let’s Nationalize Facebook,” Slate , August 16, 2012, https://slate.com/technology/2012/08/facebook-should-be-nationalized-to-protect-user-rights.html .

[69] .   Frank Miele, “Nationalize Facebook, Twitter to Preserve Free Speech,” RealClearPolitics , January 9, 2021, https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/01/09/nationalize_facebook_twitter_to_preserve_free_speech.html .

[70] .   Howard, “Let’s Nationalize Facebook.”

[71] .   Ibid.

[72] .   “Public Trust in Government: 1958–2021,” Pew Research Center, accessed September 16, 2021, https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/05/17/public-trust-in-government-1958-2021/ .

[73] .   Sarah Scire, “Radio listening has plummeted. NPR is reaching a bigger audience than ever. What gives?” Nieman Lab, August 19, 2020, https://www.niemanlab.org/2020/08/radio-listening-has-plummeted-npr-is-reaching-a-bigger-audience-than-ever-what-gives/ .

[74] .   Tom Taulli, “TikTok: Why The Enormous Success?” Forbes , January 31, 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomtaulli/2020/01/31/tiktok-why-the-enormous-success/ .

[75] .   David Thiel et al., “Contours and Controversies of Parler” (Stanford Internet Observatory, January 2021), https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/io/news/sio-parler-contours .

[76] .   “Oversight Board,” Oversight Board, accessed September 28, 2021, https://oversightboard.com/ .

[77] .   “Governance,” Oversight Board, accessed September 28, 2021, https://oversightboard.com/governance/ .

[78] .   Ceclia Kang, “Lawmakers slam Facebook oversight board’s decision to uphold Trump ban,” The New York Times , May 5, 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/technology/facebook-oversight-board-decision-reaction.html ; Kari Paul, “Facebook ruling on Trump renews criticism of oversight board,” The Guardian , May 5, 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/05/facebook-oversight-board-donald-trump .

[79] .   “Case decision 2021-001-FB-FBR,” Oversight Board, published May 5, 2021, https://oversightboard.com/decision/FB-691QAMHJ/ .

[80] .   Billy Perrigo, “Facebook’s Oversight Board Is Reviewing Its First Cases. Critics Say It Won’t Solve The Platform’s Biggest Problems,” TIME , December 7, 2020 https://time.com/5918499/facebook-oversight-board-cases/ .

[81] .   Note: ITIF President Robert Atkinson serves on the U.S. advisory council for TikTok. “Meet TikTok's European Safety Advisory Council,” TikTok, March 1, 2021, https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-gb/tiktok-european-safety-advisory-council ; “TikTok apresenta Conselho Consultivo de Segurança do Brasil,” TikTok, March 2, 2021, https://newsroom.tiktok.com/pt-br/tiktok-apresenta-seu-conselho-consultivo-de-seguranca-do-brasil .

[82] .   “Apply to join our growing Safety Advisory Board,” Snap Inc., April 20, 2022, https://snap.com/en-US/safety-and-impact/post/apply-to-join-our-growing-safety-advisory-board .

[83] .   Amanda Macias, “Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg calls for more regulation of online content,” CNBC, February 15, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/15/facebook-ceo-zuckerberg-calls-for-more-government-regulation-online-content.html .

[84] .   “What Does ICANN Do?” Internet Corporation for Names and Numbers, published February 25, 2012, https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/what-2012-02-25-en ; “Our Work,” Internet Society, accessed October 1, 2021, https://www.internetsociety.org/our-work/ ; “Standards,” World Wide Web Consortium, accessed October 1, 2021, https://www.w3.org/standards/ .

[85] .   “Help and FAQ,” World Wide Web Consortium, accessed September 30, 2021, https://www.w3.org/Help/#funds .

[86] .   “U.S.-EU Trade and Technology Council Inaugural Joint Statement,” The White House, published September 29, 2021, ​​ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/09/29/u-s-eu-trade-and-technology-council-inaugural-joint-statement/ .

[87] .   “A Declaration for the Future of the Internet,” White House, April 28 2022, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Declaration-for-the-Future-for-the-Internet_Launch-Event-Signing-Version_FINAL.pdf .

[88] .   “Consensus Playbook: Techniques for Building Consensus within the ICANN Community,” ICANN, July 2020, https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/pdp-3-4-consensus-playbook-03jul20-en.pdf .

[89] .   “A Declaration for the Future of the Internet,” White House.

[90] .   “Secretary Antony J. Blinken on the Modernization of American Diplomacy,” U.S. Department of State, October 27, 2021, https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-on-the-modernization-of-american-diplomacy/ .

[91] .   “Open Letter from Former Defense, Intelligence, Homeland Security, and Cyber Officials Calling for National Security Review of Congressional Tech Legislation,” April 18, 2022, https://aboutblaw.com/2Xf .

Editors’ Recommendations

September 3, 2021

The U.S. Government Should Take the Lead in Providing Guidance on How to Moderate Social Media Content From the Taliban

February 22, 2021

Proposals to Reform Section 230

March 17, 2021

PACT Act Has Good Intentions But Flawed Execution, Says ITIF

January 11, 2021

If Congress Moves Forward with Social Media “Interoperability Requirements,” Deplatforming Users Will Be A Thing of the Past

March 10, 2021

How Progressives Have Spun Dubious Theories and Faulty Research Into a Harmful New Antitrust Doctrine

Podcast: how section 230 promotes competition, with jessica ashooh.

• Book Solutions
• State Boards

Speech on Social Media (Short & Long Speech) For Students

Speech on social media, introduction.

Respected Principal Sir/Madam, teachers and dear fellow students. Before this beautiful day I have been given a lucky chance to address the future of our digital world. In my full effort and love I intend to say a few words regarding my topic- “Social Media”.

You are a product of your surroundings and by surroundings I don’t mean just the physical world but also the virtual world. The virtual world of social media, a media platform that is social, and a different world in its own it offers us with limitlesspossibilities. Doors which once were non-existent now being born every day, one by one with almost the whole world on social media we are now witnessing our national boundaries vanish, we are more closer and communication is pretty much instant. But we must not forget our responsibilities when we use social media. No doubt social media gives us freedom of speech and action but there are certain limits and rules to which every citizen must oblige and must recognize his or her rights on social media platforms. I think and wonder we have a very powerful and potent tool as social media yet there exist no authority who teaches us how to use it. Well I know your reaction to this question, we know how to use it and it is simple, but May I need remind you of the long list of crimes and misdeeds which criminals commit and we innocent fall prey to, and the numbers are increasing day by day. We trust someone on social media we never met and provide them with all our private information, and mistakenly if that person happens to be a felon, you are up for a rude awakening. See the problem exist not in the social media platform but the knowledge we lack in  handling strangers. Of course technology has its limits and no felon is purely immune to his or her disguise but what remains of concern here is the fact we are very careless in ways we handle our private life on social media. Talk about the advantages of social media, there are many to count like we can talk with our friends and family, share good times and memories online, we can learn with our peers and share knowledge with them. We can use social media platforms to raise money for good cause, raise awareness on social topics, and watch worldwide news. The effects of social media are debatable but we must say, everybody likes to use social media platforms. It is indeed a good form of entertainment. One more important thing we must understand is we tend to binge the time too much at times and it also interferes with our daily lives and schedules. As I ‘ve mentioned earlier, adding to it one most important thing is the use of social media must be for rightful and education causes, occasional entertainment is alright but when children and even the adults binge their time carelessly, time which can used for something productive and better, what results is clearly not good.

On a good note I would like to tell you all that social media is here to stay, decision to be a part of isn’t the problem, only problem is our irresponsible use. So use social media responsibly. Thank you all for being such a good and patient crowd.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

We have a strong team of experienced Teachers who are here to solve all your exam preparation doubts

Essay on i learn things when i play, bse odisha 8th english questions answer solution, odisha board class 8 english face masks fool the bengal tigers question answers solution, essay on 2 lessons i learnt in my class that helped me in daily life.

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Welcome to the Purdue Online Writing Lab

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Online Writing Lab at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service of the Writing Lab at Purdue. Students, members of the community, and users worldwide will find information to assist with many writing projects. Teachers and trainers may use this material for in-class and out-of-class instruction.

The Purdue On-Campus Writing Lab and Purdue Online Writing Lab assist clients in their development as writers—no matter what their skill level—with on-campus consultations, online participation, and community engagement. The Purdue Writing Lab serves the Purdue, West Lafayette, campus and coordinates with local literacy initiatives. The Purdue OWL offers global support through online reference materials and services.

A Message From the Assistant Director of Content Development 

The Purdue OWL® is committed to supporting  students, instructors, and writers by offering a wide range of resources that are developed and revised with them in mind. To do this, the OWL team is always exploring possibilties for a better design, allowing accessibility and user experience to guide our process. As the OWL undergoes some changes, we welcome your feedback and suggestions by email at any time.

Please don't hesitate to contact us via our contact page  if you have any questions or comments.

All the best,

Social Media

Facebook twitter.

From domestic violence to terrorism and war, social media is a thread that connects all the issues that now challenge us

Analysis From domestic violence to terrorism and war, social media is a thread that connects all the issues that now challenge us

It has become a standard, if unfortunate, part of Australian politics in recent years for politicians to pick up and run with some incident to crystallise public sentiment on an issue and let the media debate rage on it.

Think African gangs, needles in strawberries, Woolworths not selling enough Australia Day merchandise.

You might notice that these have tended to be the preserve of the Coalition side of politics more than the Labor side.

That Labor doesn't do it so much may be a testament to their better angels, or to the fact they have just never been good at the particular style of politics.

But we now face a perfect firestorm of issues that both challenge our community cohesion and present us with Australian society in all its ugliness.

It is a particularly complex set of issues that cannot be untangled from each other.

That makes this particular modus operandi dangerous for both those who might be tempted to practice it — and the rest of us.

We all know social media has become an unwieldy force in politics around the globe. But our political leaders are now being forced to confront, in very specific terms, the really difficult questions thrown up about when enough is enough.

A debate that has largely been framed in terms of freedom of speech has become conflated with a whole range of issues that now challenge us: from social cohesion, to terrorism, to domestic violence.

The killings, predominantly of women, at Bondi Junction and the stabbing attack on a bishop in the Western Sydney suburb of Wakeley have come at a time of horrendously relentless killings of women and amid heightened tensions provoked by the Gaza conflict.

Social media is a thread that has run through all these stories: from the misinformation and disinformation spread about the Bondi attacker while the attacks were still underway; to the live-streaming of the bishop's church service and subsequent misinformation that led to a violent riot; to questions about the growing aggression of misogynistic online content directed towards young men; to online abuse and threats of violence levelled at anyone on either side of the Gaza conflict.

Two mighty struggles

This week, e-Safety Commissioner Julie Inman-Grant took on X and Elon Musk in the Federal Court seeking to force the platform to take down 65 postings of graphic footage of the Wakeley knife attack.

She is seeking to do that under the powers the parliament granted her — under the Morrison government — in the Online Safety Act in 2021.

While there had been a lot of political noise made in the wake of the Bondi attacks 48 hours earlier, about dealing with the disinformation and misinformation that had circulated at the time, social media platforms are currently only subject to voluntary codes of conduct about removing inflammatory commentary and misinformation.

Legislation dealing with these issues is currently being considered, as are changes to the Online Safety Act — which was already under review before these attacks all happened.

The ground has now shifted under the political debates about the specifics of both those legislative developments.

But in the meantime, there are now two mighty struggles going on over how we communicate and debate each other in future.

One concerns the fight in the courts with Musk and his assertion that, in trying to force his company to take down the posts, the Australian government is not only hindering free speech, it is over-reaching into an attempt to dictate what can be seen online outside Australia's borders.

The second struggle concerns the general position of our politicians about if, and how, we reset the terms of social media's social contract.

The challenges for Dutton

The political leader in the more difficult position on this is Peter Dutton, who not only faces divisions on this in his party — and in the conservative base — but also the problem of reconciling those divisions with his own strong views about social media when it comes to issues like law and order and child abuse.

It is instructive to look at comments Dutton made on April 8 — before the Sydney attacks — about social media and its role in facilitating things like young people posting crimes, like housebreaking or car theft, online.

The social media companies, he said, have to "make sure that they take content down so that these young offenders don't get the publicity that they're seeking".

The Coalition's private members bill would set up the power to do this, he said.

"Because at the moment, a lot of people are living in fear and they're worried about whether they're going to be broken into again. It's devastating, it's confronting to have somebody coming into your bedroom or coming into your living area, particularly when you've got young children."

In the wake of the Bondi Junction and Wakeley attacks, Dutton told Insiders on Sunday that there was "no question at all" that tougher action needed to be taken against social media companies and "I think there's a bipartisan position concerning this".

"We know that the companies — and we've seen some of the comments from Elon Musk overnight — they see themselves above the law. The Australian law here should apply equally in the real world as it does online ... you would be sued for defamation and you would be taken before the courts under various acts for publishing some of that which freely flows on the internet.

"They're allowing paedophiles to distribute through their networks, images and videos of children being sexually abused, they're impeding the investigations of the police."

The more difficult question

This issue of removing explicit content is the same one Inman-Grant is trying to deal with over the bishop's stabbing.

For some, including Senate crossbenchers Pauline Hanson and Ralph Babet, and the Institute of Public Affairs, this amounts to an attack on free speech.

Dutton also faces questions about his approach from some in his own ranks.

But he can't really go too far on the question of removing violent content, given his position on things like kids posting themselves breaking the law or child exploitation.

The fact that the Australian Federal Police and ASIO emerged this week to explicitly link the violent content with terror threats also highlights the difficulties for Dutton, given his tough line on national security.

Our national security officials told us the Wakeley footage could be used just as footage of the Christchurch terror attacks had been used by IS as part of their recruitment of young men.

And we subsequently saw the arrest of five teenagers linked to the Wakeley attacker, some of whom we were told had just as graphic content on their phones.

The even more difficult question becomes how parliaments and governments deal with misinformation and disinformation, since it involves not just removing graphic images but people's opinions and, therefore, becomes a much clearer debate about censorship and free speech.

When the government put up some draft laws to deal with this last year, the Coalition howled it down.

You would have to think the optics and the policy imperatives have changed.

Who wins and loses in the Federal Court is just one aspect of the battle ahead.

Laura Tingle is 7.30's chief political correspondent.

• X (formerly Twitter)

Related Stories

What can the government do about x's refusal to take down violent videos.

eSafety commissioner wins two-day injunction against X over Wakeley church stabbing footage

Platform X fined $610,500 over gaps in child abuse prevention

• Federal Government
• Federal Parliament
• Government and Politics
• Social Media