In this day and age, our ability to express our opinions and beliefs has never been as convenient. And it seems we enjoy this ability to express ourselves because it feels liberating to do so. Many Instagram users post their content just to see those little notifications tally up to a clean sum that is proportional to their degree of social skills and popularity. This extreme freedom of expression satisfies our desire for attention so much so that we forget that others may be hurt by what we say. Social media usage shouldn’t be heavily regulated, but users should be conscious of the harm they may pose to others when using these apps.
According to the harm principle proposed by philosopher John Stuart Mill in his work “On Liberty,” Mill states that the actions of individuals should only be limited if they harm others. To apply this concept to social media, content on social media should only be restricted if it explicitly harms its viewers. Though the First Amendment right to freedom of expression may not hold jurisdiction over content posted on privately held social media platforms, it seems ethically necessary to censor inappropriate and harmful content.
Just as forms of communication like written statements, recordings or speeches can be regulated by libel, slander and plain hate speech, social media content must comply with these same restrictions. A Facebook rant or a short Vine looks and sounds harmless, but its ramifications do vary from person to person. One tends to ignore such posts if it is not explicitly targeted towards them, and if it is, this is where the line must be drawn. A post cannot target a specific person or group of people with the intent of harming them. Examples of this can be spreading false information through pictures or text or by attacking others for their identity (i.e. race, gender, religion, disability or sexual orientation, etc.). If someone wants to logically criticize another person, it must be done without personal attacks using hate speech. This abuse is harm done regardless of consent.
Consent is a very important part of preventing harm. For example, if someone tells you to not post a picture with all seriousness, then you should not post the picture. The photographer may recognize the picture as not being harmful in their own opinion, but the decision to post is not the photographer’s. Applied to Mill’s harm principle, the aggressor has no right to declare whether or not the defender, was harmed. It does not matter where, when, or how the media was recorded. If the person or people being photographed don’t consent, then the media can’t be posted. A common example of this is the circulation of nude or sexually suggestive pictures/videos. It is tolerable to send such pictures between only two people, but if either party does not consent to these pictures being widely released, the other person shouldn’t post the pictures online. A picture can be taken in a place as harmless as a park or as serious as a funeral; the only thing that matters is the subject’s decision.
Unfortunately, it is still easy for aggressors to post without fear of reprimand. Thus, the best way to prevent harm from being done on social media is to promote fair etiquette that inhibits aggressive behavior.
Social media’s widespread access has made it effectively impossible to regulate whether or not someone is causing harm. It’s up to users to make sure that what they do isn’t harmful and contributes to a safe, social environment.
