Consultation Report on Social Media Censorship by Husna Begum M R

! SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP Sam Adams Riley Davis should we monitor what people post?? Comment removed for bullying or harassment Posted December 22 at 23:59 PM

OK Think we made a mistake? Let us know. 470205998 | 470403848 | 500241114 | 500365096

Edit Cover Photo

REPORT CONTENTS 2.3K Friends

211 Mutual Add to Story

Edit Profile

Introduction ...................................................... 3 Background Information ............................. 5 Method ............................................................. 10 Data Management ....................................... 16 Findings ............................................................ 22 Reflections ....................................................... 37 Conclusion ...................................................... 42 Appendices ..................................................... 44 Bibliography ................................................... 60

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

INTRODUCTION

Reply to ARCH9090...

AIM AND PURPOSE The aim of this study is to analyse and evaluate the public’s views on social media and censorship. In order to do this, quantitative and qualitative methods will be used to understand the public’s current knowledge, usage and concerns regarding this topic where the group will conduct interviews, questionnaires and online research on social media censorship. By undertaking these different data analysis methods, effective analysis will occur to further conclude the effects of social media censorship on the public and the concerns they have about the current operation and management.

Figure 1: Free Speech Suffocated (Castillejos, 2021).

METHOD OVERVIEW The methods used were to primarily gain an understanding of public opinion both locally and internationally. In order to do this, both primary and secondary research was gathered to gain a broader insight into social media censorships and the issues at current. The primary data gathered through the interviews and questionnaires was carefully structured to gain the most relevant and useful data on the topic. The aim of both these methods was to understand the knowledge levels and opinions of people from different backgrounds and ages so that the final data is inclusive. Alongside primary data, secondary data was also used, where information was gathered from books, articles, academic reports and social media platforms themselves. Both primary and secondary methods of collecting data will allow for extensive analysis and a deeper understanding of the public’s opinions, both locally and internationally, on social media censorship.

PREAMBLES Social media censorship has been a topic of concern for many decades and has notably increased in recent years, with broad opinions circulating the world on whether social media should be censored or whether it should not, and if so, who should be in charge of this task and to what extent? Many questions surrender this hot topic, therefore this report study has been conducted to analyse the data collected from a public involvement process to evaluate the direct effect of social media and censorship on the community. This will be done by both collating the opinions of individuals and analysing a variety of data collected online to have a well rounded understanding of both the Australian and international laws related to censorship and social media.

REPORT STRUCTURE Initially, the report builds on a comms collateral conducted through secondary research, unpacking what social media is and the types of censorships associated with it. From this, background information is provided on social media and censorship, as well as the history of a variety of different platforms. Censorship is then further broken down into community, government and algorithmic censorship and its effects within Australia and internationally. Furthermore the report delves into the methods used for the research including the strategies taken during the questionnaires, interviews and twitter data. The methods used are then carried into the data management section where the purpose of the report is further unpacked and limitations are stated. The final part of the report consists of a findings section, where data collected from both secondary sources and public involvement process are analysed. The major themes from gathering data are evaluated where the results are presented in graph and table formatted to be reviewed and analysed. Finally, the report will draw a conclusion from these findings regarding social media censorship.

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Reply to ARCH9090...

DEFINING SOCIAL MEDIA The term social media is an overarching definition that commonly refers to a collection of differing virtual platforms that facilitate the establishment of communication pathways on a local and international scale. The phrase ‘Social Media’ can thus be broken down into two components: a) Social: Indicates the connection and interaction of individuals sharing, sending and receiving information. b) Media: Encapsulates the underlying method of communication, such as the internet or more traditional forms being TV and radio (Nations, 2021). The term social media is multifaceted and encompasses numerous subcategories. Whereby, the main features and tools of many social media platforms ultimately include: Personal Public and Private Accounts / Profile Pages Friends, Followers, Group Chats and Hashtags Newsfeed, Personalisation and Notification Information Updating, Posting, Sharing and Saving Likes and Comment Sections Review, Rating or Voting Systems Websites and online applications have drastically revolutionised the way people interact, communicate and express themselves on a daily basis (TAPIA, 2021). The four key social media sites that form the basis of the investigation and are currently available to the community include: Facebook: Founded in 2004 in the United States, it is the largest social media platform currently in the world, which allows people to connect and share internationally. All content can be made publicly accessible or chosen to be shared privately (Nations, 2021). Main Features - Sending private messages, posting status sharing content such photos, video & links. Instagram: Founded in 2010 in the United States, the features allow users to create a “feed” known as their homepage, sharing posts with everyone they follow, liking images and commenting on them, these features can also be specified to a private or public audience (Stegner, 2021). Main Features - Posting images and videos, liking and commenting, saving posts, private messaging, sharing stories. Twitter: Founded in 2015 in the United States, a trending social media platform generally used to send and receive news, follow high profile influencers and stay in contact with followers. The platform allows users to discover stories regarding news and events, follow individuals and/or companies and to share thoughts with an wide audience (Forsey, 2021). Main Features Microblogging and sharing of news in messages called tweets, which are limited to 280 characters making posts short and scan friendly. Tiktok: Founded in 2016 in China, a trending social media platform, used to share short videos. Tiktok is not only utilised to share dancing, comedy and lip-syncing videos but is being additionally used as an information sharing platform and for brand marketing and company use (Porter, 2021). Main Features - Sharing short videos, liking and commenting on videos of others, creating a personalised video feed, downloading videos, going live.

Add a comment ...

Post

THE HISTORY OF SOCIAL MEDIA Social media is commonly referred to as a powerful software that is thought to have primarily emerged due to the inherent human need to communicate. Merriam Webster further discloses that social media is a ‘form of electronic communication through which users create online communities to share data’ (2020). Whereby, due to the popularity of social media gaining traction over recent years, there are many questions surfacing in regards to the emergence of social media and how it has affected the everyday lives of large populations of people from differing demographics, such as the way in which it influences one’s lifestyle, how it impacts business and the economy, and the opportunity it presents for open communication between individuals and large groups of people. The following bullet points thus provide an overview of the general history of social media:

The notion of social media is believed to have first emerged on the 24th May 1844, following a series of electronic dots and dashes being drawn by a telegraph machine, now commonly referred to as morse code (Statistica, 2021). The first message that was sent electronically was sent from Baltimore to Washington Dc, by Samuel Morse who was the original inventor of social media (Statistica, 2021). The emergence of the Advanced Research Project Agency Network came to light later in 1969, which was initially created by the US department of defence to enable the transfer of software, hardware and other data amongst scientists from different research facilities (Dollarhide, 2021). Subsequently in 1987 the direct precursors of today’s internet launched the National Science Foundation, with the first true social media platform being launched in 1997 (Oberlo, 2021).Moreover, during the 1980’s to the 1990’s technology further improved and new trends emerged across digital sites. The internet further developed allowing more users to connect online with service providers, as well as the movement of emails, bulletin board messaging and real time chatting, opening a whole new channel to the original idea of social media. Following the introduction of these platforms in 2001, the registration of emails and basic online networking began to attract a large number of new users from the public (Statistica, 2021) In 2002, the first career networking platform was launched by the name of LinkedIn, which sought to attract business professionals to connect and share career profiles (Statistica, 2021) The platform increased in popularity very quickly, with more than 675 million users worldwide utilising the online application to network and connect with individuals and businesses who are like minded (Statistica, 2021) The launch of LinkedIn was later followed by Myspace in 2003. Within 3 years of its launch it was classified as the most visited website worldwide, however this was notably very quickly overturned when Facebook emerged in 2004 (Statistica, 2021) Today’s modern social media is populated by a suite of services with the most prominent social media networks being Facebook, founded in 2004. Twitter founded in 2006, Instagram founded in 2010, snapchat founded in 2011 and Tiktok being the latest to launch in 2016.

Add a comment ...

Post

SOCIAL MEDIA CONCERNS AND ISSUES Social media has played a vital role in modern history, from empowering the citizens with free speech to creating social disruption through hate speech. The resulting debates on the extent of free speech and social appropriateness on social media platforms has formulated the key concerns addressed in this report. Furthermore, the main concerns associated with social media primarily revolve around three main questions: Governance: to what extent should government companies or technology be involved in regulating social media platforms? Monitoring: to which extent should social media platforms be monitored? Freedom: How do we understand freedom of speech in social media?

CENSORSHIP IN SOCIAL MEDIA Censorship ideally refers to the restriction of speech or public communication, which is mainly driven through government, social media platforms through in-built algorithms and guidelines or community themselves in some cases (Meta, 2021). However, all these governance structures have their inherent issues. In case of community censorship, there is always an underlying threat of silencing the unpopular opinion and amplifying the majority’s voices. While, increasing influence of government on social media have demonstrated the curbing of free speech and ‘anti-regime’ political opinions (Lim & Al rasheed, 2021; Warraich, 2017). However, on the other hand, disclosure of information by the social media companies to the Government have also saved human lives. For instance, an event of data shared to the UK and Indian government prevented a person from suicide and helped the government nab criminals, respectively (Meta, 2021). Censorship through Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms have demonstrated the lack of ability to understand the context. The algorithms which were supposed to minimise bias have evidence of introducing ‘Algorithm Bias’ (Lim & Al rasheed, 2021; Warraich, 2017). Latest interdisciplinary studies are working towards shifting from Algorithmic governance to Governance of Algorithms (Ebers & Cantero Gamito, 2021).

AUSTRALIAN AND INTERNATIONAL LAWS Similar to other websites in Australia, social media platforms are censored by the nation’s criminal law system. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) is recognised as possessing the power to both control and monitor content. Despite the existence of departments who have the authority to regulate social media content, unlike overseas there has been a significant policy issue with many proposals that are brought to the attention being refused (GuardChild, 2021). Therefore, in 2019 the Senate passed a bill in response to the Christchurch Mosque Shooting, stating that all content that is uploaded to a social media platform can be removed from the host social media service in order to ensure the removal of “inappropriate” content immediately (GuardChild, 2021). Moreover, despite social media platforms providing their own guidelines, Australia has both Federal and State laws that outline what content can and cannot be posted on the internet. While the notion of freedom of speech is recognised in Australian legislation, the Government and High Court of Australia have further put forward policies that prevent the circulation of content that references violence, abuse and other harmful data (Statistica, 2021).

Add a comment ...

Post

AUSTRALIAN AND INTERNATIONAL LAWS CONTINUED Conversely, international laws regarding social media differ significantly depending on one’s context. For example China is thought to enforce very strict rules when it comes to the availability of particular social media platforms to their citizens, as many online applications are banned to the public and are replaced by their own platforms (Kepios, 2021). Iran has adopted a similar approach with many social media networks being banned in fear of their community passing on information to foreign countries (Kepios, 2021). The existence of censorship in these two contexts effectively reference a different governmental approach to the regulation of comments and posts, as the presentation of content is heavily influenced by law and cannot be disputed.

DID YOU KNOW... 1) There are currently 3.78 billion social media users worldwide (48%) (Oberlo,2021). 2) The daily time spent on social media worldwide increased from 90 min per day in 2012 to 145 min per day in 2020 (Statistica, 2020). 3) 88% of teens have witnessed another bullying another on social media (Guardchild, 2021). 4) 86% of the population aged 18-29, 80% of 30-49 year older, and 64% of 50-64 year olds use social media daily (Statistica, 2020). 5) 32% of teen girls say that Instagram has made them feel worse about their bodies (Northeastern,2021). 6) An account on instagram will typically get taken down after 3-4 reports (Gramto,2021) 7) From January to June 2021, a total of 351,471 user’s information has been requested to facebook by governments (Meta, 2021). 8) From July to Dec 2020, a total of 38,524 legal demands were made by governments to remove accounts from twitter (Twitter, 2020).

Figure 2: Censoring particular words can

Figure 3: Social Media a source for

misconstrue and disassembles the message trying

(Mis)information (Whamond, 2021).

to be evoked (Global Voices, 2021).

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

METHOD

Reply to ARCH9090...

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT METHOD The public involvement methods incorporated in this study ranged from informing the potential participants on the scope of the topic to consulting them through various qualitative and quantitative methods. The chart below outlines the sequence of the public involvement process incorporated in the study.

29th November 2021

Commencement of Intensive Unit

1st December 2021

INFORM: Communication Collateral Fact Sheet

Sell Document

CONSULT: Internet Database (Twitter)

CONSULT: Online Questionnaire

14th December 2021

CONSULT: Online In-depth Interview

22nd December 2021

Conclusion of Intensive Unit

Continual Data Collection

13th December 2021 14th December 2021

INFORMATION ON THE TOPIC A suite of communication collateral was produced to empower the potential audience who are unfamiliar with the hot topic (social media censorship) and provide them with the knowledge to make an informed decision during the consultation process. WHAT IS IT? “A communication collateral is print or digital media material that are used for promotion of the Public Involvement event and inform the public with the factual content and process” (Schueller, 2021). Although various forms of passive materials can be used to inform the public, a suite of Fact Sheets, Image Poster and Sell Document has been used in this study. The research content (facts & graphics) on social media censorship (selected hot topic) was presented in the Comms Collateral through interplay of text, graphics, and signposting (refer to the appendix).

Add a comment ...

Post

USING INTERNET DATA (TWITTER) Data collected from secondary data sources like internet databases (Twitter) has been used as one of the techniques to understand the wider public opinion and discussion on social media censorship. WHAT IS IT? Twitter is a global platform that allows its members to post (tweet) opinions/ information publicly within its 280-character limit. The data collection can be done by the users using the in-built filter settings or various external data scraping software. However, for the purpose of the study, considering the time and cost constraints, an inbuilt filter mechanism has been used to curate data using hashtags and keywords (York, 2020).

PROS The method is quick, inexpensive, and user-friendly allowing researchers to collect large amounts of data within limited resources. It provides access to information from wider audience across countries and social profiles The voluminous twitter archived database allows to analyse the change of trend over the time It provides access to real time data on the hot topic trends It provides opportunities to understand the relation between the social networks that are actively discussing the hot topic through exploring the organisations, personalities an individual or organisation follows.

CONS The data tweeted on the platform is subjected to the platform’s guidelines and the government regulations. It is to be noted that not all countries allow the access of Twitter platform, hence may not provide insights of those potential audience. Although twitter is available in various languages, the report is restricted to English tweets only. The data available may not necessarily be factual, it can be influenced by the popular opinions and unreported fake news.

Figure 4: Twitter Homescreen showing news feeds and search bar to explore the platform (Twitter, 2006)

Add a comment ...

Post

ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE An online questionnaire technique has been used as a public consultation strategy in this study. The method takes a positivist approach to gauge a broad understanding and opinion of the wider public on social media censorship. The process was carried through recording the self-reported characteristics, behaviours, opinion, and expectations of the participants. WHAT IS IT? A survey is the measure of variables through recording answers for the same questions in the questionnaire by every respondent. It provides ‘hard’ quantitative data to derive a casual relationship between the social reality using statistics.

PROS Online web-based survey is a fast and inexpensive way to collect data from wider range of participants. The method generates quantifiable data that can be compared between the respondents by following a ‘linear research path’ with the same sequence of questions for every respondent. This method allowed a precise measurement of social reality through use of standardised questionnaire and measurement scales for all the respondents (For instance: Measurement scales likes discret:e age groups, Yes/no options and so on as shown in Fig. 5). The standardised data collection provides an opportunity to derive the causal relationship of social reality. The standardisation of the procedure makes it easy to replicate for large survey group and in future research

CONS As the sampling group for this method was selected through non-probability convenience sampling, the respondent group is restricted to the researcher’s social network only. Online questionnaire technique is restricted to people who have access to the internet and excludes other user groups. The insights derived from this technique is restricted to the level of measurement used in the questionnaire (For instance: The range of age groups selected as in Question no. 3, generalises characteristics/behaviour for the age group, while a more detailed analysis may exhibit variation of characteristics with the age group as in Fig. 5). The method does not provide sufficient insight on the context of the data collected (For instance: The question no. 10 in the questionnaire, on the expectation of future social media censorship, does not provides the reason or context of the answer). The method does not generate a deeper and more complex understanding of the hot topic. The causal relationship derived through this method can be falsifiable through other empirical evidence.

Add a comment ...

Post

CONS CONTINUED The data collected is what people believe is appropriate, while the actual actions may differ (For instance: People may believe political content should be censored in social media, but they themselves may support political criticism). This concept is further explored by Pager and Quillian (2005, as cited in Neuman, 2012).

Figure 5: Question No. 2 from the online questionnaire with discrete measurement scale (discrete age group) as a Quantitative Research Method (Begum et al., 2021)

ONLINE IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS An in-depth face to face interview technique has been used as one of the public consultation strategies in this study. This method provides a deeper and contextual understanding on a hot topic, through an interviewer guided questions on a selected group of interviewees. WHAT IS IT? In-depth interview is a qualitative research method used to obtain detailed information on the hot topic (social media censorship) from the respondents through open-ended, discoverable question structured to understand the opinion, experience, and feelings of the interviewee (Wallace Foundation, 2021)

Add a comment ...

Post

PROS The method takes a ‘non-linear research’ method providing opportunity to discover new ideas / concepts on the selected hot topic. The method provides a deeper and complex understanding of the hot topic with opportunity for probe questions to gain better understanding on the topic. Non-verbal communication like contextual cues, tone and expression of the respondent provides an additional connotation to the answer. Provides opportunity of the interviewer to control the topic, direction, and pace of the interview.

CONS The method is time consuming and expensive. (For instance, this method took approximate of 3 hours in total to interview, transcription, review the interview and analyse of each interview). This method has a risk of interviewer bias through use of wordings, tone of the interviewer. The respondents may interpret question based on their familiarity and experience in a way easier for them to answer. The depth of knowledge of the participants may influence the quality of the answers. Although the interview structure can be replicated, it is difficult to replicate the interview itself. It provides opinions / expectations of the selected respondents and need not necessarily be the opinion of the wider public.

Hi...

Figure 6: Online In-depth Interview via Zoom Application as a Qualitative Research Method (Huddleston, 2020)

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

DATA MANAGEMENT

Reply to ARCH9090...

DATA MANAGEMENT Public involvement in this study was conducted by consulting the public through three methods – Searching internet databases (Twitter), Online Questionnaire and Online In-depth Interviews. All the process has been carried out collaboratively by four researchers (authors of this report), who are based in Sydney during the Intensive December 2021 session of the University of Sydney.

INTERNET DATABASE (TWITTER) Data from secondary data sources like internet databases (Twitter) has been used to understand the opinion of various stakeholders like public, personalities, government, social media platforms, third party organisations on social media censorship across the world. Although various methods and software are available to scrape twitter data, considering the time and cost constraints for this report, the twitter data has been collected using the in-built ‘advanced search’ filter in twitter (as shown in Fig. 7). Key words, hashtags, languages, and dates have been used to filter out relevant information (as shown in Fig. 8). Although twitter data is available in many languages, it is to be noted that the report captures opinions and information that are posted in English only (as shown in Fig. 9). To maintain the relevancy of the data, the search was limited to post from 1st January 2020 onwards (as shown in Fig.10). This process of scraping twitter data was conducted over the intensive December session of the University of Sydney from 29th of November to 22nd of December 2021. This non-linear research path explored the opinions and information on social media censorship from various mainstream and minority organisations including Chron, The Hill Corporation, Talk Radio, 7 Amleh based out from different parts of the world. The posts were explored and illustrated in the findings section of this report to understand various topics like the type of content that are censored and the social media governance structure across the world. The findings sections also explore the freedom of speech in social media platforms by following minority organisations as well. The number of tweets and followers of an organisation were taken as a data point to measure the popularity and the credibility of the organisation followed.

Figure 7: Shows the filter option with respect to location and

Figure 8: Shows ‘advanced filter’ through hashtags and

social networks in twitter (Twitter, 2006)

keywords in Twitter (Twitter, 2006)

Add a comment ...

Post

Figure 9: Shows ‘advanced filter’ through language in Twitter

Figure 10: Shows ‘advanced filter’ through date range in Twitter

(Twitter, 2006)

ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE Online survey has been used as one the consultation strategy to gauge a broad understanding of the public on the issue of social media censorship. The method was used as a primary strategy to study the characteristics, behaviour, and expectations on social media censorship across different backgrounds and age groups.

DESIGN OF QUESTIONNAIRE The questionnaire design is a critical component to give effect to this consultation strategy. The length of the questionnaire was decided based upon a reasonable time of five minutes to complete the entire survey by the respondents. The questions were initially drafted through collaborative effort of all the researchers on a Google word document, which after final draft was entered on the Qualtrics platform. The total of nine questions were subdivided into 4 sections, while the first two sections recorded the characteristics of the respondents, the last two sections recorded the experience & opinion regarding content and governance structure for the censorship respectively. It is to be noted that although the first two sections record the characteristics of the respondents, the first section is also used to filter out the participants who do not use social media. This is done by terminating the survey for those respondents who chose the exclusive option of “I do not use social media” in question one (Refer Appendix). The questionnaire was designed with single choice or multiple-choice answers to enable precise measurement between all respondents. It is to be noted that most of the single/multiple choice questions had an option of ‘other’ with space for data entry to record the answers not listed in the options. This feature allowed a flexibility in closed questions to discover answers not previously hypothesised by the researcher. The different types of scales used in the questionnaire were the discrete scale and the Likert scale. For instance, in question no. 2, the ages were grouped into discrete scales depending upon the characterises of the social media usage. While in question no. 3, the data of average time spent on social media from the fact sheet were used to formulate its discrete scale. On the other hand, question number 6, shows the application of the Likert scale in the questionnaire (Refer Appendix).

Add a comment ...

Post

RELIABILITY The overall quality of the questionnaire was controlled through various settings. An introduction section with an outline of survey and participation consent has been introduced in the beginning of the survey (as shown in Fig. 11). Additionally, human captcha verification has been introduced to eliminate bots participating in the survey (as shown in Fig. 12). To improve the response quality, all the questions in the questionnaire were made compulsory, by choosing the ‘Force response’ option in the Qualtrics. The user interface of the survey was enhanced through improving the graphics by introducing thematic background image, completing bar and transition effect. After the completion of the questionnaire, the survey was published for beta testing through Qualtrics, and the ‘anonymous link’ was generated. The link was circulated among the researchers, supervisor, and few close friends to understand the quality of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was subsequently improved with the feedback received for the final rollout.

DATA COLLECTION The sampling for the data collection has been carried out through a non-probabilistic convenience sampling method. Each of the four researchers listed down 25 close friends and families to whom the generated anonymous link was circulated. Although it was ensured to circulate the link among people of varying age groups, it is to be noted that the age and social network of the researchers play a dominant role in the sampling of the participants. The survey was collected from the public on 13th and 14th of December 2021. The quality of the responses was maintained by deleting the incomplete entries. A total of 100 fully completed survey were collected.

DATA ANALYSIS The data collected was analysed using the inbuilt ‘data and analysis’ feature of the Qualtrics. Each of the responses was tabulated into bar graphs, and pie charts to analyse the responses. It is to be noted that the outlier information has also been captured during the analysis. The analysis of the data provided insights on the experiences, opinion, and expectation of the wider public on the future of social media censorship.

Figure 11: Introduction section of online survey showing the outline of the survey and consent to proceed (Begum et al., 2021).

Add a comment ...

Post

Figure 12: Introduction of human captcha verification in the online questionnaire has been introduced to eliminate bots participating in the survey (Begum et al., 2021).

ONLINE IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW An online in-depth interview was conducted to comprehend the context and gain a deeper understanding on the issue of social media censorship. This resource intensive task involved interview structure formation, organising interview logistics, conducting interviews, and analysing its data.

INTERVIEW STRUCTURE FORMATION The interview structure was formulated as a collaborative effort of all the researchers. An exhaustive list of possible questions was tabulated in a google word document, considering topics like interviewee’s characteristics, experience, opinions, knowledge, and expectations. Although the list has been exhaustive, it included the important questions (demarcated in red) and the probe questions (as shown in the Appendix). The integrity of the answers was maintained by keeping the questions open ended and unbiased. For instance: An open question like “Have you ever been reported or have you ever reported any content on social media?”, is followed up with probe questions like “Would you like to elaborate more on the incident?” (For those who have answered YES) or “What type of content do you usually post or see on social media?” (For those who have answered NO). This process not only keeps the question open ended, but probes to extract more detailed information. In addition to formulation of questions, a ‘participation information statement’ and ‘participant consent form’ were drafted for the interview (as shown in Appendix). These forms provided information on the interview topic, stakeholders, process and requested consent for recording, quoting, identifying the participant, respectively. An interview schedule for the 30 minutes interview was drafted with questions on Introduction, Characteristics, Behaviour, Opinion, Knowledge, and Expectations sections being allocated one, three, six, six, five, and seven minutes respectively.

Add a comment ...

Post

ORGANISING INTERVIEW LOGISTICS The logistics for the online interview were organised by each of the four researchers by scheduling a personal interview room on Zoom application. It is to be noted that settings for the meeting were set to ‘Automatically record the meeting’ ‘In Cloud’ (as shown in Figure 13). This process would enable the automatic transcription of the meeting after the end of the meeting. A setting to enable zoom waiting room was enabled to prevent zoom bombing or entry of other participants during the interview process. After the beta testing of the scheduled interview zoom room to prevent any technical glitches, the zoom meeting link was shared on the padlet on ARCH 9090 in the canvas for the interviewees to enter the room during their time slot.

ORGANISING INTERVIEW LOGISTICS A total of 12 interviews were conducted with each of the researchers individually conducting three interviews in their respective zoom room. The interviews were conducted on 14th December 2021 from 13:10 hours to 14:40 hours AEST with each of the interviews lasting for upto 30 minutes approximately. As soon as the zoom meeting was started by the interviewer, the recording was stopped. When the first participant entered the zoom room the interview process began. The process began with introducing the interviewer, explaining the interview topic & process followed by requesting the consent for recording, identifying, and quoting the participants. When the participants granted their consent the recording ‘in cloud’ option was selected by the interviewer. The interview was guided by the researcher in accordance with the above discussed interview schedule and all the meetings were completed ahead of the scheduled time. After the first participant exited the zoom meeting, the recording was stopped and the next participant in the waiting room was allowed to enter. This process was repeated for all the participants. It is to be noted that the participants were pre-determined by the ARCH9090 unit coordinator and were well informed about the topic through the Fact Sheet shared before the interview process.

DATA ANALYSIS After the completion of the meeting, the recorded interview was automatically transcripted in English by the zoom application. The recordings and the transcription that were available on the cloud (accessible through university mail id) were individually reviewed by the researchers and synthesised into the answers for each of the questions as outlined in the question formulation section. The main answers revolved around the characteristics (age, location, work), behaviour (social media usage pattern & purpose), experience (reporting or have been reported), knowledge (awareness on existing terms and conditions), and expectation (future of social media censorship in terms of content and governance structure).

Figure 13: Advanced setting for scheduling meetings on Zoom Application (Yuan, 2021).

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

FINDINGS

Reply to ARCH9090...

WHAT DID WE FIND OUT? Overall, the findings of the collated questionnaire, interviews and twitter data, provided a thorough understanding of our topic of social media censorship and the purpose of this study. Each collation method provided in depth subjective data from a variety of people of different backgrounds, ethnicities and countries, resulting in a broad scope of information gathered to understand the issue. The aim of this data collection was to answer the purpose of the study where we aimed to understand society’s perspective on the operation of social media and their views on what should and shouldn’t be censored on these platforms. Dependant on their background and age, the findings varied throughout the survey, questionnaire and twitter data. Some of our key questions and findings throughout all the data collation methods included: The types of people that use social media The ages of people that use specific social media platforms The demographic of people that are more involved in voicing social issues online The amount of time people spent on social media platforms dependant on age How long different types of people spend on social media

How social media usage differs from country to country The awareness of what can and cannot be posted on social media platforms Collating information about how people think social media data should be managed Understanding personal opinions on what should and shouldn’t be censored

The findings in each data collation method varied due to the differences of questions that were asked in both interviews and questionnaires and the current information found on twitter. These findings will be further elaborated on in more depth below where there is a breakdown of each form of data collation and an overview of the information gathered.

TWITTER FINDINGS By searching a variety of hashtags and following key political and organisational twitter groups, we were able to gather some quality data on this platform regarding the current social media censorship issues occurring. Our findings on twitter was mainly aimed at trying to collate data from a variety of different countries so we are able to compare it to the local questionnaire and interview data. Some of our key findings came from sources such as Chron, The Hill Corporation, Talk Radio, 7 Amleh and other organisations that had both factual and opinion-based insights on censorship online. By looking at this data, we were able to analyse different opinions globally and the current reforms put into place against social media censorship. Below are some of the retweeted relevant tweets that were found globally.

Add a comment ...

Figure 14: Search Bar Examples (Twitter, 2021)

Post

EVALUATION OF RETWEETS

Figure 15: Retweet regarding Turkish President’s views on social media censorship in Turkey A tweet was posted recently that expressed the Turkish president’s view on social media censorship, voicing that he thought it was a “threat to democracy.” Erdogan’s main aim was to announce the need for stricter censorship on social media platforms in Turkey. Within the tweet, an article link discussed that the president aimed to criminalize the spread of “fake news” and false information that would land the perpetrator 5 years in prison (Maas, 2021). Within Turkey, the government is in control of regulating and monitoring social media where if a particular platform has more than 1 million Turkish users, it will need to have legal representation (Maas, 2021). Social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have since developed offices within Turkey to ensure that the platforms are adequately regulated.

Figure 16: Retween regarding quantative data on documented censorship from Arabic Organisation 7amleh

Add a comment ...

Post

Another relevant retweeted article provided quantitative data from 7amleh, an Arabic Social Media Advancement company. The tweet included documented cases of social media censorship among a variety of platforms where the organisation themselves undertook a censorship study. This data was presented in a graph form, where Facebook has the most recorded censored items from September to December of 2021. Throughout this study, 7amleh found that there were 49 violations of human rights on Facebook, 25 on Instagram, 5 on Tiktok and 1 on twitter, with the social media platforms banning content on Palestinian rights. Although, the Palestinain issue is Geo-political issue of middle east (7amleh, 2021). The post demonstrated how social media platform could be biased on one opinion and curb the free speech of another.This can conclude that these platforms are either being influenced by political organisations, or more people are reporting on these particular platforms risking the free speech rights of the minorities. In accordance to previous studies, the majority of Facebook users in 2021 are predominantly the older generation in comparison to other platforms. The majority of Facebook users are between the ages of 25-45 (Omnicore,2021) which may be a key factor to why many more posts are being reported in the 7amleh tweet. Users of Tiktok on the other hand are predominantly between the ages of 15-25 where there is less content being reported. Tiktok is also a new social media platform in comparison to Facebook, therefore also may be a contributing factor as to why there are not as many posts being censored.

3 An interesting retweet we found was from England’s TalkRADIO where the interviewee Richard Tice is explaining his views on how he thinks there is “too much censorship” on social media. The retweet includes an short interview clip where Tice explains that his tweet got reported where the public were unable to like, comment or retweet his post. The post regarding COVID and his opinion on the effectiveness of wearing masks was challenged in the tweet where Tice provided his opinion on what he thought about the censorship of his post. The tweet was then deemed as ‘medical misinformation’ and was reported from Twitter (TalkRADIO, 2021). This interview looks through a different lens in comparison to 7almeh, where Tice explains that there is too much censorship occurring on these platforms and he is unable to voice his opinion without it being flagged. This information was interesting to evaluate whilst contrasting it to the Turkish government tweet, where one country is encouraging freedom of speech whilst another is wanting to place even more restrictions on what can be spoken about online.

Add a comment ...

Figure 17: Retweet on the talkRADIO Richard Tice Interview on social media censorship

Post

Figure 18: Retweet on the Minds Twitter account regarding how censorship is affecting online businesses. Minds, a neutral public form organisation retweeted that they believe social media is taking censorship too far and destroying countless businesses and people’s livelihoods by reporting posts that are not illegal. The organisation states that many posts being banned or reported are from small companies and businesses that are unable to defend themselves, being of detriment to their careers and livelihoods. Minds’ stance on social media censorship is that these platforms are banning unnecessary content that have a detrimental effect on its users. This idea of unnecessary censorship has been a reoccurring theme throughout the twitter findings where on numerous occasions, users believe that platforms are “over censoring” posts.

5 Chron, an organisation in Houston, Texas tweeted information about a current event that occurred within their state, where a federal judge created a censorship law that prohibits social media platforms form banning content involving another’s pollical view. Gov. Greg Abbott on September 9th 2021, created the “House Bill 20” law that aimed to moderate content on large social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter to make it increasingly enjoyable and safe for users. (Garcia,2021) This tweet has 1,682 retweets and was posted on numerous other platforms due to the immense support this law had from the residents of Houston. This tweet provided information on how strongly this state feels about public political opinion and Texas’ stance on freedom of speech on social media platforms.

Add a comment ...

Figure 19: Chron article on federal judge creating a censorship law on social media

Post

CONCLUSIVE TWITTER FINDINGS From researching tweets by filtering through relevant hashtags and accounts, a variety of different opinions on social media censorship surfaced. As Twitter is a global platform the information gathered for the topic was broad and relevant where contrasting and similar opinions were able to be evaluated. From organisational tweets from Turkey, to talk show interview tweets in England, a variety of perspectives were gathered where some organisations deemed that they wanted an increased amount of censorship and others thought there was too much. These opinions from both individual twitter users and well-known organisations were valuable to understand the topic of social media censorship globally. Alongside the interviews and questionnaires data, the collated twitter data was valuable to understand a variety of different perspectives.

QUESTIONNAIRE FINDINGS In order to gain additional research, a questionnaire was used to understand the public’s opinions on social media censorship, where 100 participants were surveyed to express their personal experiences on social platforms. The 9 questions were formulated specifically to gain an insight into what social media platforms are most frequently used, how long each participant spends on these platforms, their knowledge on censorship and who they think should monitor “inappropriate” content. The aim of collecting these questionnaires was to disperse them to a variety of people of different ages and backgrounds. To gain quality research, the answers needed to be inclusive of a broader pool of people to allow for a variety of opinions from different demographics. Below is a breakdown of the questions asked within the survey and a collation of findings from the data gathered.

Q.1

Please select the social media applications that you use?

(Qualtrics, 2021)

Add a comment ...

Post

Q.1 FINDINGS: The initial question aims to understand what social media platforms are used the most. The options that were initially provided were Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Tik Tok, where the sureveyees were either able to choose multiple options or provide a written answer in the “other” box. In the pie chart above it is clear that Facebook and Instagram have the most users out of the 100 participants that completed the questionnaire, where 34.82% use Facebook and 33.93% use Instagram. Tik Tok on the other hand is the third most popular, having 14.73% users, Twitter recieved 9.38% and the “Other” option recieved 7.14% where all participated that selected this, specified Snapchat. The findings from this question concluded that the most popular platforms were Facebook and Instagram.

Q.2

Please select the age group that applies to you?

(Qualtrics, 2021)

Q.2 FINDINGS: The second question was specifically aimed to understand the age demographic of people being surveyed. The results concluded that majority of people surveyed fell under the 20-24 age bracket, where 34% of participants checked this option. 24% of participants were of 25-29 years of age, where the remaining were quite evenly distributed among the other age brackets. Collating data from a variety of different age groups is important to understand the differences in opinion in regards to social media censorship. Creating these subgroups where people are categorised according to age is vital when analysing social media as usage where opinions substantially differ depending on age and generation.

Add a comment ...

Post

Q.3

How long do you typically spend on social media everyday?

Total

(Qualtrics, 2021)

Q.3 FINDINGS: This question was used to understand the usage of social media among the ages. The answers were specifically grouped according to prior research on how long the average person spends on social media being approximately 2.5 hours a day. The data gathered throughout this questionnaire supported that claim, where majority of people checked the 1-2 hr and 2-3 hr box. 29% of people used social media more than the average amount daily and only 19% utilised it for less than an hour. The usage here is quite evenly distributed, however, on average, participants utilise social media 2.5hrs a day on average. This question was not only asked to understand the participants usage, but also may suggest the likelihood of people witnessing reported content or censorship on social media.

Q.4

Specify the reasons why you use social media? ( you may select more than one)

(Qualtrics, 2021)

Add a comment ...

Post

Q.4 FINDINGS: This question delves into the reasoning behind why people use social media where the data aims to find common reasons as to why these platforms are being utilised so frequently. The most common answer was unsurprisingly to contact family and friends where 23.51% of participants using social media specifically for communicative purposes. Closely behind with 20.20%, participants use social media to follow the news and subsequently use it for entertainment purposes with 19.87% of participants using these platforms to watch videos or play games. Surprisingly, posting photos and videos was only 18.21% concluding that participants prefer to use social media to contact people and follow the news as a pose to posting their own content.

Q.5

Has your social media content ever been reported, or have you ever reported another’s post?

(Qualtrics, 2021)

Reasons why content was reported or the participants account was reported:

Account reported for voicing political views

Reporting scam accounts or posts

Sport related post was taken down for being shared

Reporting fake news

Post got reported due to copyright

War related images were reported

Reporting abusive / explicit content

Reporting racist or homophobic content

Reporting innappropriate/ illegal content

Add a comment ...

Post

Q.5 FINDINGS: Question 5 aims to understand firstly if the participants have ever been reported or reported another account on social media and subsequently, and if they have, the reasoning behind this. The majority of participants checked “no” to this question where 82% of people claimed that they haven’t ever reported or been reported on any platform. However, the 18% of participants that claimed yes provided reasoning behind their answer, some of which were more prevalent among the answers. Above are some of the reasons participants provided as to why they checked yes, having the answers that were repeated more than once are shown in the darker blue shade. Multiple people had their account flagged or reported for voicing their political views as well as reported fake news on these platforms. Due to COVID 19, fake news and people’s political opinions has been prevalent over the past 2 years on social media, where many people are voicing their stance on the matter publically.The participants are therefore aware of this occurring, which may be the reason as to why reporting fake news and political views is a common answer.

Q.6

To what extent are you likely to agree that existing social media Terms and Conditions / Community Guidelines are reasonable in regulating the appropriateness of content?

(Qualtrics, 2021)

Q.6 FINDINGS: The aim of this question was to understand how much people knew about what they should and shouldn’t post on social media and if they had read the community guidelines on the platforms they use. As expected, the highest percentage of people, 36%, checked the “not sure” category that states they haven’t read or seen the guidelines. However, 34% of people agree with the terms and conditions and believe that they know what can and cannot be posted on social media. Through these findings we were able to conclude that majority of participants hadn’t read the guidelines before joining the platform or on the other hand, had read them and agree that they are clear in identifying what users can or cannot post.

Add a comment ...

Figure 20: Facebook sign up page (Facebook, 2021)

Post

Q.7

What types of content, in your opinion, should be censored on social media?

Q.7 FINDINGS: Question 7 delved into understanding the participants’ opinion on what should and shouldn’t be censored on social media. The options were collated from previous research both online and through personal experiences where there seemed to be a trend among the data gathered. Majority of people answered that they thought hate speech and fake news should be censored on social media followed by provocative content. This trend correlates to question 5 where majority of the answers were also fake news and hate speech. However the participants seemed to put less emphasis on censoring political opinion, only having 6% of participants check this box. Conclusively, the surveyees believe that political opinion should not be censored as much as fake news and hate speech on social media platforms.

Q.8

Do you know who currently monitors and regulates the appropriateness of content on social media?

(Qualtrics, 2021)

Add a comment ...

Post

Common answers regarding who the participants think monitors and regulates content:

The Social Media Platform 5 Participants stated this answer

The Government 4 Participants stated this answer

Other 1 Participant stated Individual Companies 1 Participant stated that it depends on the country

Q.8 FINDINGS: It was important when collecting the data, that we were able to understand if the participants knew who was in control of monitoring and regulating content on social media platforms. In the bar graph above, 90% of participants answered “no” to this question, signifying that they didn’t know who regulated the posts. However, within the 10% that checked yes, there were 3 main answers that were common amongst the majority. Many of the participants stated that they thought the social media platform themselves or the government was in control of monitoring content. 1 participant stated that they thought it depended on the country and another stated that individual companies and their “taskforces” were in control. On the whole, majority of the participants didn’t know who monitored or regulated the platforms they were using ,which concluded to be a key finding in understanding the limited knowledge the participants had on the topic of censorship on social media platforms.

Q.9

Who do you believe should be responsible for regulating and monitoring content on social media?

(Qualtrics, 2021)

Add a comment ...

Post

Q.9 FINDINGS: Question 9 is an opinion based question where the participants are asked who they think should monitor social media platforms. 59% of participants stated that they believe the social media platforms themselves should be in control of regulating the content posted, ranking as the top answer when collating the data. 18% then stated that they thought the government should monitor platforms, however surprisingly, 14% of participants believe that it shouldn’t be monitored at all. The fact that only 14% of people though that it shouldn’t be monitored at all signifies that the majority believe that content should be monitored and it should be the social media platform themselves that should report or censor posts.

INTERVIEW FINDINGS The interview process was created to allow for the interviewees to express their opinions on social media censorship and elaborate on their own concerns on the current platform operation. The group as a collective decided to incorporate the most relevant and important questions into the interview, where every group member posed the same question structure. This allowed for the results to be consistent among all interviews so that the data could be easily analysed and evaluated. The interview was broken down into 4 sections which included characteristic questions, behavioural questions, attitude and opinion questions and finally knowledge questions. Within each section, there were key questions highlighted in red that we deemed to be the most important and valuable in terms of gathering data on social media censorship. Below is an overview of our findings according to the most common and relevant answers asked within the interview:

Questions Average age of interviewees

What social media platforms do you use?

How long do you use social media per day?

Answers 23-25 years old Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, Tiktok, Youtube, Whats App, Weibo (similar to twitter), WeChat (only used in China)

Usage varied from 1 hour to 12 hours. On average, majority of interviewees spent approximatly 6 hours on social media per day

Why do you use social media?

The most popular answers amongst all interviews were to connect and chat with family and friends, post photos/ videos, follow the news

Have you ever had something that you’ve posted been reported or have you ever reported something that someone else posted on their social media platform?

Approximatley half of the interviewees had reported other content but had never been reported. They had reported content such as fake news, rumours and gossip, copyright

Add a comment ...

Post

Questions

Answers

Have you ever looked at the terms and conditions before signing up to social media?

Majority answered that they had never read the terms and conditions or it was very unclear as to what they could and couldn’t post.

Interviewees opinions on current level of censorship of social media

Should social media be regulated? / What type of content should be regulated?

A variety of opinions were expressed on the current level on censorship ,maining dependent on the country the interviewee was from. The interviewees from Australia on average think that social media platforms should be increasingly monitored however private chats and converstations shouldn’t. In China however, the online protocols and increasingly strict in comparison to Australia where for example, content such as gambling are illegal to mention online. Although it is strict, interviewees don’t see this as a major issue.

Majority of interviewees suggested that social media should be regulated, however only on specific topics such as fake news, crime, abusive content etc. Many answers revolved around agreeing that users should have freedom of speech and be allowed to post what they want online. Therefore, content should be monitored to an extent.

Do you voice your opinion on social issues online?

Interviewees on average had very strong opinions on social topics however didn’t want to voice their opinion on social media. This was mainly due to the drama and backlash they may recieve from voicing their concerns on such a public forum.

Who should be responsible for regulating and monitoring social media ?

The answers were fairly consistent among all interviews where majority of people thought the either the social media platform should be responsible or the government. Some answers also revolved around social media and the government undertaking this role together in a co-partnership to ensure that the platforms are properly managed.

Add a comment ...

Post

INTERVIEW FINDINGS Throughout the interview process, it was interesting to understand people’s opinions in regards to their experiences with social media and particularly censorship. As the interviewees were from different backgrounds and countries, a variety of responses were collated and compared to understand the effects of social media and how other countries control these online platforms. Majority of participants agreed that on the whole, social media should be monitored, however only to an extent. Many interviewees stated that there are many unnecessary reporting instances online which is hindering our freedom of speech. As social media is becoming more prevalent every year, where there are an increasing amount of users and new platforms emerging, the interviewees believe that they have become more aware of reporting and censorship due to their increasing usage during COVID 19. False news and hate speech were topics of converstation throughout each interview where many participants stated has increased during the COVID 19 lockdown period. This is mainly due to people being more active online and therefore their concerns on social media platforms. Conclusively, the interview process was a great tool in understanding a vareity of different perspectives and gaining in depth information on the questions provided. The group was able to understand the knowledge the interviewees had on social media censorship, their personal usage and how it has changed over the years, their concerns about social media and most importantly, their personal opinion on what should be censored and who should be monitoring online platforms.

(Clinch, 2021)

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

REFLECTIONS

Reply to ARCH9090...

STEPHANIE’S REFLECTION The public involvement process over the past couple of weeks allowed for the group to analyse and evaluate the public’s views on social media censorship. Delving into this topic and gaining qualitative and quantitative data on the issue of censorship, allowed the group to collate a broad data set to assist in the understanding of social media usage in today’s society. Through online research, monitoring twitter posts, conducting interviews and surveys, the group was able to gain subjective opinions from people of different ages and backgrounds. The data gained from these methods were diverse and categorised accordingly so that the group was able to evaluate the direct effects of social media censorship on the community. What did you learn from this process? The process from beginning till end was well managed and enjoyable. From collating the data to the process of evaluating the information, the team worked extremely well together. Due to this, undertaking the comms collateral, creating the surveys and writing the interviews was a fluent process. Some of the things that I learnt throughout this was how different types of data can provide different lenses on the topic, some more helpful than others. However, I learnt that it is essential to have a variety of data collection methods to be able to provide a wholesome understanding of social media in addition to the qualitative and quantitative research collated. What surprised you about the process? Something that surprised me about the process was that I got very unexpected, yet valuable data from the interview process. As many of the interviews were conducted with students living overseas, I was able to gain an insight on how social media censorship operates globally, and different views on monitoring online platforms. There are also many different social media forums overseas that are not used within Australia as their main form of communication, especially in China, where Facebook is not being used as frequently. Globally, there are also many topics that aren’t able to be expressed online. For example, in China, gambling is prohibited on social media platforms. Gaining an insight into how other countries control their social media platforms alongside how their terms and conditions operate was very interesting to learn about and surprised me throughout the research process. What would you do differently? Throughout the process, something that I think we should have done differently is have the ability to speak to or survey the younger generation. As we only had a limited amount of questionnaires that we could collect, we didn’t gain any information about how the youth (between the ages of 10-16) use social media and their views on censorship. As social media use is extremely prevalent among this generation, it would have been interesting to have their opinion as a comparative measure among the rest of the interviews and questionnaires. What advice would you give? For future groups studying this topic, some of the advice that I would give is to do research early and gain an understanding of a variety of components within social media before conducting any questionnaires or interviews. This will then narrow down what to focus on, as the topic of social media has an abundance of information and is a broad topic. I would also recommend carefully thinking about the survey and interview questions prior to creating them in order to gain relevant and useful answers from the interviewees. This will allow for an efficient process that will assist when collating the final report.

Add a comment ...

Post

HAWRAA’S REFLECTION The public involvement process conducted as a group happened through three particular methods, conducting surveys, interviews and collating twitter posts relevant to social media and censorship. These methods allowed us a group to better understand the opinion and knowledge of the public, through these methods we were able to collect specific data to later analyse in order to put together a report showing the effect of social media censorship on the community and have first-hand primary data of the community’s opinion due to this effect. What did I learn from this process? The process of data collection has been a very smooth, as a team we cooperated, ensuring we regularly meet to put together the data collection methods accurately, to be able to receive the most beneficial feedback from our surveys and interviews. I specifically learned that team work can be a lot easier then imagined when every team member contributes with the knowledge they have, also having a team organiser was a bonus and one of the reasons our group was run smoothly, confidently a skill I could later apply to future projects. Through the data collected I also learnt that it is essential for primary data collection to happen across a broad age group, ethnicity and gender, as the results were very broad and every human category had their own voice which was important to be heard for a fair analysis. What Surprised me about this process? In general, I was surprised by the broad results retrieved, opinions ranged differently to my expectations in regards to censorship. A lot of international candidates actually enjoyed the influence of the government and did not mind at all that their access was limited and censored, an opinion I did not expect to receive, whilst Australian candidates more specifically wanted stricter censorship on certain topics, whereas my expectation were people were more after eased restrictions and freedom of speech. What would I do differently? The process of data collection was very smooth, I believe this was the case as we did not undertake these methods under real circumstances, for instance surveys were only limited to our family, friends and close work colleagues, It would have been interesting to see if these survey and interviews were conducted randomly with strangers who were not expecting the topic of social media and censorship, would the results had differed? What advice would I give? My advice to future groups would be to study your topic very well, ensure your group as a whole are understanding of your aims and objectives from the methods of data collection. Communicate regularly with your team and ensure everyone is working towards the same objective during all stages of the research. It is also very essential to be very specific with the questions asked in questionnaires and interviews, they must be sharp questions that are not long and only use simple language to ensure you are understood by all.

Add a comment ...

Post

RACHEL’S REFLECTION The overall public involvement process was extremely successful, as it allowed us to gain a greater insight into the usage and behavioural patterns of people who are currently signed up to varying social media applications and delve into the existence of censorship on these online platforms. Whereby, a multifaceted engagement process was conducted and consisted of initial online research, twitter posts, in-depth interviews and questionnaires. These differing methods thus enabled the group to complete a rigorous investigation process that effectively responded to existing data sources and additionally facilitated the collection of subjective data. The key takeaways from the process are further identified below: What did you learn from this process? Consultation is not as easy as it appears, there are numerous factors that need to be taken into account when attempting to engage with the community, such as equity, accountability, honesty, responsibility and transparency. As a means to ensure that our consultation strategy appropriately responded to these themes various engagement methods were utilised, therefore allowing us to capture a broader pool of opinions and insights from people of differing backgrounds and experience levels. What surprised you about the findings? Data that was retrieved from the questionnaire was generally expected, with the results reflecting many of our initial presumptions regarding general usage patterns and the level of people’s understanding of where the responsibility of regulation typically lies. Nevertheless, what did surprise me was the data that was received during the interview process. I naively went in with the assumption that the information that would be attained would ultimately mirror that of the data collated via the questionnaire, however I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of information that came out of our interviews. During the interviews that I personally conducted I was able to delve deeper into one’s experience with social media and also gain a greater insight into trends and usage conditions for social media platforms internationally. A number of our participants were situated in China and their responses effectively provided a comparison between patterns that are currently unfolding in Australia versus overseas. What would you do differently if you got the chance to do the whole process over again? The only component that I would do differently if I was given the opportunity to partake in this consultation process again would be to become more familiar with Twitter earlier in the course opposed to leaving it towards the end of the intensive unit to engage with the application. Unfortunately because I had not used Twitter before I wasn’t very comfortable in retweeting posts, however once I sought assistance from teams members and started to engage with content it became easier. What advice would you give someone consulting on your hot topic, the next time around? Social media as a topic is extremely broad and I would suggest narrowing down the overarching research aim and objectives. Even though as a team we were solely investigating the presence of censorship in social media platforms it was still quite broad and drilling down further would have been more beneficial. It is believed that the findings drawn from the data would have been more insightful if a single focus area was identified, as it was an immensely ambitious proposal to explore themes surrounding censorship, freedom of speech and fake news in the short period of time that we were allocated.

Add a comment ...

Post

HUSNA’S REFLECTION The public involvement carried out during the past three weeks brought a deeper insight on the public’s experience, opinion, and expectations on social media censorship. The process was a collaborative effort of every team member to gather data points for qualitative and quantitative analysis. The data collected from primary and secondary sources through research, online survey, online in-depth interviews, and monitoring twitter database, provided a pool of information from people of diverse characteristics (age, country, social profile). This information helped the team to evaluate the effect of social media censorship on the public and understand the expectations on the future of social media. What did you learn from this process? Although public involvement gives an apparent impression of being an easy task, it isn’t. It requires sophisticated understanding of the process and experience. In my opinion, the process of designing a questionnaire and framing interview questions had been a challenging part. For instance, the importance of considering the research aim and translating it into the measurement scale for the questionnaire had taught me the skill of extracting relevant information for analysis. Also, during the interview, Although the list of probe questions was already prepared, some of the interviewee’s answers were unexpected. The challenge of following the interviewee’s answer and guiding them with relevant questions, taught me the skill to frame impromptu questions in an interview. I also realised that this skill of mine improved with the number of interviews conducted; hence experience is important component in public involvement. The process also taught me the important components of successful teamwork. With an intensive task of public involvement within a short span of time, the importance of teamwork is imperative for its success. The best practices, I take from this project is to clearly frame and mutually decide the roles and responsibilities of every team member at the beginning of the task. This practice of project management has helped in smoothly conducting the teamwork. What surprised you about the findings? The surprise moment in the entire public involvement process was during the analysis of the in-depth interview session. With my upbring in a country with democratic values, my experience on social media censorship has been starkly different from my interviewees in the in-depth interviews. It was surprising to learn how social media censorship has manifested globally across countries, with countries like China have their own social media platforms (which were unfamiliar to me). This process gave me a new perspective in understanding different cultural backgrounds and helped me to improve my cultural competence. What would you do differently if you got the chance to do the whole process over again? With limited time and resource constraints in this process, some of the methods were limited to outcomes for class requirements. However, if the process is to be repeated, the participants for the online survey could be taken from beyond friends and families. This widening pool of audience would bring a wider perspective to the hot topic. Also, I would consider taking a survey by getting myself on the streets and experience the process of talking to strangers. Secondly, I would consider using sophisticated software to scrape twitter data and analyse how the debates on social media censorship has change over the time. What advice would you give someone consulting on your hot topic, the next time around? For the upcoming research groups, exploring this topic (social media censorship), I would recommend to firstly narrow down the topic. Although this process has given a broader understanding of social media censorship, the topic can solely focus on content to be censored and expected governance structure for rich insights. Also, the process can also be restricted to one country, rather than focussing on how it differs globally.

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

CONCLUSION

Reply to ARCH9090...

CONCLUSION The popularity of social media has significantly increased over recent years, due to notable advancements in technology and the extension of functions these online platforms provide for not only young individuals but for a wider range of age groups, such as for entertainment, social/political, retail and educational purposes. Due to social media being a prominent trend within current societal norms the way in which individuals engage with content is required to be critically reviewed and key trends acknowledged to effectively uncover behavioural patterns and specific monitory options that are available. Whereby, the overall purpose of the implemented consultation strategy was to gain a greater understanding into these rapidly evolving trends and further assess the process and purpose of regulation by the social media platforms. This was successfully achieved via a rigorous engagement process that included initial secondary research via a Communication Collateral data set, “retweeting” related posts on Twitter and additionally collating primary data through the execution of a questionnaire and online in-depth interviews. The overall purpose and conclusions of each method are summarised below: Twitter: Collectively we were tasked with exploring the content that is available on Twitter that specifically related to our area of study. A vast pool of articles, videos and general posts that were primarily opinion based were uncovered. The collation of content thus enabled the assessment of varying opinions both locally and internationally regarding the current debate surrounding social media censorship, freedom of speech and fake news. This was an effective exercise as it allowed us to assess varying perspectives on this controversial discussion and further compare these statements and judgements against the primary data that was later compiled through the engagement process. Questionnaire: A total of 100 questionnaires were collected as a means to uncover the community’s view on social media censorship. This was achieved by a series of nine targeted questions that sought to reveal one’s personal experiences with interacting with social media platforms and their expectations/views on how and who should be responsible for monitoring these online applications in the future. For example, the data revealed that 90% of surveyed participants were not aware of who actually regulated and monitored the content that is displayed on such platforms. This is identified as being a really concerning number as it suggests that many have a limited understanding on the governing procedures behind the content that is presented on social media. In-Depth Interviews: Twelve in-depth interviews were conducted on the 14th December 2021 and unlike the circulated questionnaires the interviews were deliberately designed to extract key insights and opinions in regards to social media censorship and encourage one to elaborate on their specific concerns in relation to the operation and regulation of these online platforms. Whereby, the interviews were strategically structured to uncover their behavioural patterns when using social media, their attitude and opinions and finally their overall knowledge. The data that was collected from their twelve thirty-minute interviews were rich with insight and were a valuable asset that were utilised to achieve the overarching aim and purpose of the consultation strategy. For example one of the major themes that surfaced during the evaluation of the interview content was that many of the participants were of the opinion that there are many unnecessary reporting instances currently evolving online which is significantly hindering our freedom of speech. Furthermore, following the completion of the above data collection methods it is believed that an in-depth understanding of the existence and one’s interaction with censorship on social media platforms was successfully attained. While the collated information has identified themes that require further investigation, as a whole the engagement process is acknowledged as appropriately responding to the underlying objectives of the report.

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

APPENDICES

Reply to ARCH9090...

Edit Cover Photo

SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP 2.3K Friends

211 Mutual Add to Story

WHAT IS SOCIAL MEDIA? The term social media is an overarching definition that commonly refers to a collection of differing virtual platforms that facilitate the establishment of communication pathways on a local and international scale. ‘Social Media’ Indicates the connection and interaction of individuals sharing, sending and receiving information.

Encapsulates the underlying method of communication, such as the internet or more traditional forms being TV and radio (Nations, 2021).

The term social media is multifaceted and encompasses numerous subcategories. Whereby, the main features and tools of many social media platforms ultimately include: Personal Public and Private Accounts / Profile Pages Friends, Followers, Group Chats and Hashtags Newsfeed, Personalisation and Notification Information Updating, Posting, Sharing and Saving Likes and Comment Sections Review, Rating or Voting Systems Websites and apps have revolutionised the way humans interact, communicate and express themselves on a daily basis (TAPIA, 2021). The four most popular social media sites currently operating include:

Edit Profile

SOCIAL MEDIA: DOUBLE EDGED SWORD? Facebook: Founded in 2004 in the United States (Nations, 2021). Instagram: Founded in 2010 in the United States (Stegner, 2021). Twitter: Founded in 2015 in the United States (Forsey, 2021). Tiktok: Founded in 2016 in China (Porter, 2021).

Add a comment ...

Social media has played a vital role from overturning totalitarian regimes to becoming a potential threat for social unrest through hate speech. Various cross-organisations have attempted to stabilise this entropy of information, which is disputed on the grounds of freedom of speech and social appropriateness. Censorship through Algorithms, Community Reports and Government have the key players in regulating the content, introducing their respective partisanship into the process.

Post

4 Search

ALGORITHMIC CENSORSHIP

KEY CONCERNS

Although it is widely assumed that AI based algorithms minimise bias in regulating content, researchers have revealed the existence of ‘Algorithm Bias’. Evidence demonstrates the algorithms intended for regulating hate speech have in turn propagated it, as they lack the ability to understand the context. For instance, studies show that the African American lingo was increasingly prone to be categorised as derogatory (Lim & Alrasheed, 2021). Latest interdisciplinary studies are working towards shifting from Algorithmic governance to Governance of Algorithms (Ebers & Cantero Gamito, 2021).

The main concerns that have been identified with social media specifically revolve around three key questions:

COMMUNITY CENSORSHIP

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Social media conglomerates depending upon the ‘User-reported’ content, is a major form of content regulation, which is reviewed against the company’s established community guidelines and policies. Although the reporting received is reviewed by moderators, the method poses the threat of silencing the unpopular opinion and amplifying the majority voice. For instance, the song ‘Freedom for Palestine’ by celebrated artist Coldplay was banned on Facebook due to extensive reporting by users (Lim & Alrasheed, 2021).

There is no doubt that social media has changed today’s society and the way in which the world operates. Social media can be looked at through both a positive and negative lense, due to it being a platform that can be used as a way to connect and communicate with people in a split second. In today’s society, people of all ages rely on social media, where on average an individual will spend up to 145 minutes on a variety of social media platforms daily (Northeastern News, 2020). Debates around freedom in social media has come to the surface in recent years, therefore it is necessary to comprehend the community’s perspective to ensure the fair, equitable and safe use of these platforms.

GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP The freedom on social media varies from country to country, with some countries like China and Iran imposing complete ban, while other Asian countries heavily monitor the content (Armstrong, 2021). Transparency reports from Facebook and Twitter reveal an increasing trend of government’s demand on censoring ‘anti-regime’ content, with Turkey making the highest request for censoring user accounts from 2016 to 2019 (Meta, 2021; Twitter, 2020). Reports exist that demonstrate bias by social media on request by the governments towards activists in disputed territories, however on the other hand, disclosure of information by the social media companies have also saved human lives (Lim & Alrasheed, 2021; Warraich, 2017). For instance, an event of data shared to the UK and Indian government prevented a person from suicide and helped the government catch criminals, respectively (Meta, 2021).

Add a comment ...

Governance: To what extent should government, companies or technology be involved in regulating social media platforms? Monitoring: To which extent should social media platforms be monitored? Freedom: How do we understand freedom of speech in social media?

Furthermore, issues regarding who is in control of these social media platforms, what we post on these online applications and to what extent should these social media forums be regulated, are required to be addressed. Should the Government be in control of what is posted, should schools and education facilties have a say, or should the responsibility remain with the social media platforms themselves? These questions need to be resolved, as internet “trolling” and restricted content seems to be having a detrimental effect on users. Social media is an ever evolving phenomenon, thus we need to question how do we continue to monitor this and attempt to understand the ramifications that accompany the use of these online applications for future generations.

Post

ANNOTATED IMAGES

Image One: Censoring particular words can misconstrue and disassembles the message trying to be evoked (Global Voices, 2021).

Image Two: The effects of social media on the brain forces this addictive cycle (Clark, 2021).

Image Three: Statistics of the percentage of social media users by generation (Oberlo, 2021).

Image Four: Social Media Suppression (Armstrong, 2021).

Image Five: Free Speech Suffocated (Castillejos, 2021).

Image Six: Social Media a source for (Mis)information (Whamond, 2021).

Add a comment ...

Post

SOCIAL MEDIA

CENSORSHIP lisa_matteo: should we monitor what people post?

! SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP Comment removed for bullying or harassment Posted December 1 at 1:59 PM

Sam Adams Riley Davis Should we be monitoring this? Think we made a mistake? Let us know.

Add a comment ...

There is no doubt that social media has drastically changed the way we all stay informed and communicate both on a local scale and internationally. With the popularity of these platforms significantly increasing at an uncharted rate many questions regarding censorship and freedom of speech have been raised, specifically should it be regulated, who is in control and to what extent should it be monitored? To help us gain a greater insight into this we are currently seeking volunteers to aid us in our investigation into themes surrounding censorship guidelines for social media platforms. As a participant you will have the opportunity to share your thoughts through a questionnaire and a survey that will feed directly into our research project.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE A SAY IN HOW YOU CONTINUE TO USE SOCIAL MEDIA and you are over the age of 18 years then we would love to hear from you! For more information or to sign up please use the following contact information: (02) 9351 2222

mail@haveyoursay.com.au

Post

PROJECT INFORMATION STATEMENT

Add a comment ...

Post

CONSENT FORM

Add a comment ...

Post

QUESTIONAIRE Welcome, The study is conducted as part of class exercise for ARCH9090 Dialogue, Deliberation and Engagement at unit of study with Architecture, Design and Planning at the University of Sydney. Your participation in this survey will help us understand your experiences and opinions on different social media platforms. Participation is voluntary and your responses will remain anonymous.

Q1. Do you agree to participate in the survey? YES, I agree NO, I do not agree Q2. Please select the social media applications that you use: Facebook Instagram Twitter Tiktok I don’t use social media Other: Please Specify Q3. Please select the age group that applies to you: 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ Q4. How long do you typically spend on social media everyday? Less than an hour 1-2 hours 2-3 hours 3-4 hours 5+ hours Q5. Specify the reasons why you use social media? (You may select more than one) To post photos and videos Contact family and friends Entertainment (videos & games) To follow the news Shopping Advertising Campaigning Other (Please Specify)

Add a comment ...

Post

Q6. Has your social media content ever been reported, or have you ever reported other’s post? YES (please explain the incidence). NO Q7. To what extent are you likely to agree that existing social media Terms and Conditions/Community Guidelines are reasonable in regulating the appropriateness of content? Strongly Agree: The conditions of use are clear and I know what can and cannot be posted. Agree: The conditions of use are somewhat clear and I roughly know what can and cannot be posted. Disagree: There is minimal information and the reasons behind why I can’t post certain things is unclear. Strongly Disagree: They don’t provide enough information and I don’t understand the reasons why I can’t post certain things. Not Sure: I’ve never looked into the conditions and guidelines. Q8. What types of content, in your opinion, should be censored on social media? (Please explain your answer) Political Opinions Satire Bulk Forward Messages Fake News Hate Speech Provocative Other (please specify) Q9. Do you know who currently monitors and regulates the appropriateness of content on social media? YES (please specify) NO Q10. Who do you believe should be responsible for regulating and monitoring content on social media? The social media platform itself The Government Private Organisations e.g. Schools, Workplaces etc It should not be monitored Other (please specify)

We thank you for your time spent taking this survey. Your response has been recorded.

Add a comment ...

Post

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Interview Legend: General Question & Starred/Key Questions Introduction/Overview (Approx. 1 min) Today's interview will analyse your views and usage on social media, particularly your opinion on censorship and the operation of different social media platforms. Your answers will be used for further analysis to elaborate on the issue of censorship currently and allow us to gain an understanding into your personal experiences with these platforms. If you could please state if you would like your answers to remain anonymous and if you give us your consent to quote you for our research. Characteristics (Approx. 3 mins): 1. If you are comfortable, could you please share your name and age? If not we can move onto the next question. 2. What is your background, are you currently working, studying, etc.? 3. On average how many hours would you say you work in a week/study? Behaviour (Approx. 6 min): 4. What social media platforms do you currently use? (A lot of emerging social media platforms in this day and age has prompted people of all ages to create accounts, whether it being to connect with people, entertainment purposes and so on) 5. Would you like to share how long you use each of the social media platforms per day? - During that time what are you generally using it for? (Do you use it for contacting friends/ family, posting videos/photos, following news, shopping/market place, campaigning ? ) 6. Has your usage of social media platforms changed since 5 or 10 years ago? - What did you used to use back then? - Have your reasons for using social media changed over the years? 7. Did you ever witness anything being demonetised or reported whilst using those social media platforms in previous years? - What type of reported content has there been? 8. Have the incidences of reporting escalated in recent years? - Why do you think that is? (Is there more awareness around it now? Is that why you are noticing it more?) Attitude/Opinion (Approx. 6 mins): 9. Have you ever had something that you’ve posted been reported or have you ever reported something that someone else posted on their social media platform? - Can you provide some background in regards to why this content was flagged? - If you haven’t, have you ever come across anything that has been reported? It can be a comment, accounts or videos. Explain what happened? - Do you agree or disagree with the decision? - Did the platform take action to censor the content? 10. Have you ever looked at the terms and conditions before signing up to social media? 11. Do you know what they say about posting “inappropriate content?” 12. Do you think that adding this information into the terms and conditions is an appropriate way to let people know what they should and shouldn't post? 13. How do you think social media should inform people on what to post and what not to post on social media? (Giving monthly updates through email? Creating a video to engage people into what they should and shouldn’t post?)

Add a comment ...

Post

Knowledge (Approx. 5 mins): 14. What type of content do you usually post on different platforms? 15. Do you know who monitors and regulates the presentation of “appropriate” content on social media? 16. If you were about to upload a post on one of your social media platforms, would you say that you are confident in knowing what is appropriate or inappropriate content to post? 17. How enthusiastic are you about social issues? - Do you voice them, or would you voice them? - Do you think discussions of such topics should be allowed on social media? Expectations (Approx 7 mins): 18. Should social media content even be regulated? 19. What type of content do you think should be regulated? 20. Do you think that people should have the freedom to post and say what they like on social media? - For example, if someone posted something that they didn’t intend any harm to, however someone took offence to the comment or post, do you think it should be deleted without warning? - The issue of fake news circulating on social media is currently a hot topic at the moment, do you think that this should be monitored, or are people permitted to voice their opinions however they see fit? 21. Who do you believe should be responsible for regulating and monitoring content on social media? (Do you think the government should be, schools and workplaces, the social media platform themselves?)

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW - VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT Interviewer: If you are comfortable could you please share your name and age. Interviewee: My name is Joshua Ram and I am 23. Interviewer: What is your background, are you currently working, studying, etc.? Interviewee: Yeah I’m doing both at the moment, so I study full-time and working part-time. Interviewer: Okay too easy, and on average how many hours would you say you work and study in a week? Interviewee: Um to working is 15 hours per week. Studying is a bit harder to figure out, um lets just say 20 hours. Interviewer: Yeah perfect. Alright so the first question regarding social media, so what social media platforms do you currently use? Interviewee: So I use Facebook, Instagram and yeah I think that’s everything that I use. Interviewer: Perfect. Would you like to share how long you typically use those two social media platforms? Interviewee: Um so I use Facebook for messaging mainly. So would that count in how long I’m using that? Interviewer: Yes I would include that.

Add a comment ...

Post

Interviewee: Yeah so um frequently throughout the day including messaging but Instagram I mainly check that once a day. Interviewer: So during that time what do you typically use it for? Obviously Facebook for messaging then but what do you use Instagram for? Interviewee: Just to keep up to date with people I guess to look at stories and recents posts and then Facebook I might scroll through my feed at the end of the day. Interviewer: So do you think that over the last 5 to 10 years your use of social media has changed at all? Like were you using different apps back then to what you are using now? Interviewee: It has definitely declined a lot since High School. I feel like in High School I was using it a lot more um back then and since then I’ve kind of slowly stopped caring about it. Interviewer: Yeah that’s fair. Were you using anything different back then? Interviewee: Um Snapchat was more back when I was younger, that I don’t really use anymore. Um just trying to think if there were any other things. No there weren’t any other major ones. Interviewer: And what are your reasons for this change is use? Like you said you reduced the amount of the time you spend on social media, is there a reason for that? Interviewee: Just a lack of interest. Yeah just kind of growing up I guess. But yeah there’s no real need for me to use it anymore, other than to keep up with messaging people and I don’t post that much at all. I think the last post I made was to get people to do my survey [laughs]. Interviewer: Yeah that’s fair enough. Okay so next question, did you ever witness anything being demonetised or reported whilst using those social media platforms in previous years? Interviewee: No not on those platforms but I have seen it happen on Youtube. But I wasn’t sure if that was a social media because that a different kind of platform. But yeah um not on Instagram or Facebook, no I haven’t. Interviewer: Okay so do you think incidences of reporting has increased over the years at all? Interviewee: Um I think people are more aware of the system and how it works now, so people can collectively target something in order to get it removed. Um I think people were reporting back then but I just don’t think it was a targeted strategy. Interviewer: Perfect. Um so have you ever had something that you’ve posted been reported or do you know someone like a family or friend that has had something of theirs, either a comment or post, being reported? Interviewee: Yeah I’ve actually had a comment taken down from Facebook. I tagged one of my friends in something, like a meme or something, and it was in reference to like something that had happened but I think, I don’t know if it was automatically done or someone reported but it contained something that went against community guidelines or something but I don’t know, it was stupid and I didn’t agree with it. Interviewer: Yeah I was about to ask you if you agreed with the decision?

Add a comment ...

Post

Interviewee: Yeah no it was ridiculous what that was. Interviewer: Did you get an option to dispute it at all? Interviewee: No, they just gave me the message that it had been removed um because it went against the terms of service or something. Interviewer: Okay so one of our first sort of starred questions is have you ever looked at the terms and conditions before signing up to any of these social media? Interviewee: No none of them. I don’t think anyone does. I’d be surprised if anyone answers yes to that [laughs]. Interviewer: So in regards to that do you know what is appropriate and not appropriate content to post? Like if you haven’t read it, do you personally know what you can post? Interviewee: Yeah like I guess it’s just common sense. Um so obviously things like nudity wouldn’t go on there, like um hate speech, racism all those sorts of things aren’t appropriate for social media. So I think there are obvious things that like when you know you do something wrong it’s not going to be allowed so I guess but yeah um specifics I wouldn’t know. Interviewer: Okay yeah so do you think the current community guidelines are an appropriate way for letting people know or should there be another way for these platforms to let us know what is appropriate or not appropriate? Because as you said you haven’t read them, so people are often just guessing sometimes on what they can post. Interviewee: I think that within the signup process there should be some sort of interactive thing. Like how games and tutorials have an explanation of how to use them there should be a similar guide. If this is such a big problem within social media we should have more of a sort of, sorry just trying to find the word um but they should put more effort in in educating the user base before signing up and knowing what is right or wrong rather than just a legal list of terms that no one is ever going to look at. Interviewer: So more like plain English, something that everyone can understand. Interviewee: Yeah exactly. Interviewer: Alright so what type of content do you usually post on your platforms? Interviewee: Um so I don’t post regularly at all but let's say if I go sight seeing or somewhere that’s nice I’ll post that or say I’m at a big social event and take some nice photos I’ll post that up. Um but other than that I don’t really do much. Interviewer: Alrighty so what type of content do you interact with then? Interviewee: Yeah so I’ll look at people’s stories to see what they’re up to. Um also on Facebook I follow companies to keep up to date on what’s going on and also just memes and stuff. Interviewer: Yeah perfect. Alright so do you actually know who monitors and regulates content on social media?

Add a comment ...

Post

Interviewee: Um I think it’s up to the individual companies right? Interviewer: Yeah that’s right. So if you were about to upload a post on one of your social media platforms um would you say that you are confident in knowing what is appropriate or not appropriate content to post? Interviewee: Somewhat yeah. I don’t know that fine intricacies of it because sometimes it might be just one little thing flags it but generally yeah. Interviewer: Yeah that’s fair. Um so the next question is how enthusiastic are you about social issues? Interviewee: Um no not really. Interviewer: Do you think that people are allowed to voice their own opinions on social issues on social media, do they have a level of freedom of speech? Interviewee: Yeah definitely I think that they have the right. Interviewer: So in terms of that though there’s a discussion between freedom of speech and fake news, do you still think it’s appropriate and how do you regulate that? It’s difficult when someone has an opinion and you try and monitor that, where do they draw the line? Interviewee: Yeah um that’s a tricky one because people have the right to express themselves but then in saying that whatever they say shouldn’t be taken to heart so to speak like you have the right not to listen as well. It gets a bit hard when but I guess it comes down to the individual like if you kind of blanket everything because not everyone is going to believe like fake news but some people are more susceptible to that so I guess it’s really hard to monitor and um develop something that would keep that at bay without banning it because if you go ahead and ban everything then you run into the problem of censoring information. And yeah um that’s what I’ve been noticing as well like on a lot of posts there would be automatic information banners that would say oh this information sorry click here for more information on this topic which makes things worse I think because it’s like okay why are you trying to push this sort of thing? There’s heaps of issues that could have this towards it and why is it only certain information that is an issue? So I think there is no real easy way of going about it. Interviewer: Yeah exactly. It’s just like you said before like if you had something that you posted reported and you can’t dispute it then it’s no longer freedom of speech then is it? Interviewee: Yeah exactly! But then again it’s their company and they can dictate what they want on their platform. It’s different to going out on the street and shouting it because you signed the terms and conditions. Interviewer: Next one, so should social media content even be regulated? Do you think there is a need for it to be regulated? Interviewee: There has to be some sort of form of regulation I guess against like illegal activities because you don’t want people running ramped say on the dark web but I think it should operate at a sort of low level and not be intrusive. I think right now it’s moving to something that is becoming intrusive which is a worry. Interviewer: So in your opinion what type of content should be regulated? Like hands down someone shouldn’t be allowed to post that type of content?

Add a comment ...

Post

Interviewee: Yeah so um things involving crime so like say maybe even things involving violence but it depends if it’s real or not because you then get movies and all that where it’s fiction, so um real graphic things like that shouldn’t be allowed. Hate speech and all that, like um real bullying not just like um what Twitter would call bullying but actual targeted bullying and attacks on people shouldn’t be going on. Interviewer: Yep perfect. So do you think that people should have the freedom to post and say what they like on social media? For example like if someone posted something that they didn’t intend any harm to but someone took offence to it, do you think it should be deleted without warning? Interviewee: No, if it’s not meant to be offensive and fundamentally isn’t offensive but someone has taken offence to it then it shouldn’t be taken down at that one person’s expense. Interviewer: So the next question is about fake news, so the issue of fake news circulating on social media is currently a hot topic at the moment, do you think that this should be monitored, or are people permitted to voice their opinions however they see fit? Interviewee: Personally I think it’s up to the individual to investigate what they see and question it themselves. I know it does pose a big risk but if they are that easily swayed by that like they could be easily swayed by anything really. Within the media they do things like this all the time but obviously a lot less full on. I know when Facebook when a meme gets posted and mentions covid or vaccines or something there would be constant banners everywhere saying this isn’t real information, I think that causes even more distrust almost because it’s kind of for just one thing rather than for so many other things. So I think that they kind of need to take a step back and let people do their own sort of research instead of being force fed this in a way. Interviewer: Yeah definitely. Okay so last question for today, who do you believe should be responsible for regulating and monitoring content on social media? Should it remain with the social media platform or should there be a different party that is monitoring it? Interviewee: I think it should fall to the um company that runs it because it is their own platform, their own private company and they should deal with it how they see fit. If the individual doesn’t like how it’s being run then I guess they have the option to leave or something but I guess that becomes a problem in the sense when there is societal pressure on all these platforms and you kind of miss out on certain aspects of your life if you’re also not involved in that. It’s a hard one though [laughs]. Interviewer: So say you’re at school, should a school have a say in what their students post because again you have a reputation to uphold? What about workplaces and private companies? Interviewee: Yeah it’s very tricky [laughs] but then it’s also like the division between your own personal life and professional but with that I think that people have a right to sort of a personal little bubble that is separate from that but when it starts going public and affecting the image of the company or school then they also have a right to remove certain content that doesn’t match their image. Interviewee: That is all of our questions for today. I just wanted to say thank you for your time and your honesty in answering our questions today. Hope you enjoy the rest of your afternoon.

Add a comment ...

Post

ARCH9090 2h

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Reply to ARCH9090...

Armstrong, M. (2020) infographic: Where social media is supressed. Statista infographics. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/chart/23804/countries-blocking-social-media/. Begum, H., Haddad, H., Tanevski, S., & Murray, R. (2021). Social Media Censorship. Sydney.au1.qualtrics.com. Retrieved 21 December 2021, from https://sydney.au1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_2lvxfMI5s8PvqB0. Clinch. (2021). Hiring Events are Back: 7 Steps to Bring Yours from Concept to Live with Recruitment Marketing. Retrieved 20 December 2021 from https://www.clinchtalent.com/resource/blog/hiring-events-are-back-7-steps-to-bring-yours-from-concept-to-live-with-rec ruitment-marketing/ Castillejos, D. (2021). Social Media and Stifling Free Speech. DarylCagle.com. Retrieved 30 November 2021, from https://darylcagle.com/2021/01/15/social-media-and-stifling-free-speech/. Dollarhide, M. (2021). Social Media: Sharing Ideas and Thoughts. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/social-media.asp#citation-12 Ebers, M., & Cantero Gamito, M. (2021). Algorithmic governance and governance of algorithms (1st ed., pp. 1-22). Springer Link. Forsey, C. (2021). What Is Twitter and How Does It Work?. Hub Spot. Retrieved from https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/what-is-twitter. Garcia, A. (2021). Gov. Greg Abbott's social media censorship law struck down in federal court. Chron. Retrieved 20 December 2021, from https://www.chron.com/politics/article/Texas-Greg-Abbott-social-media-censorship-law-16668725.php. Global Voices (2021)., The evil of banal censorship. Retrieved 30 November 2021, from https://globalvoices.org/2021/08/24/the-evil-of-banal-censorship/. GuardChild (2021)., Social Media Statistics | GuardChild. Retrieved from https://www.guardedchild.com/social-media-statistics-2/. Gramto (2021)., How Many Reports Are Needed To Delete An Instagram Account 2021. Retrieved from https://www.gramto.com/how-many-reports-are-needed-to-delete-an-instagram-account/. Huddleston, A. (2020). Video Interviewing 101 | People Plus. Peopleplusinc.com. Retrieved 21 December 2021, from https://www.peopleplusinc.com/blog/video-interviewing-101. Kepios. (2021). Global Social Media Stats — DataReportal – Global Digital Insights. Retrieved from https://datareportal.com/social-media-users Lim, M., & Alrasheed, G (2021). Beyond a technical bug: Biased algorithms and moderation are censoring activist on social media. The conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/beyond-a-technical-bug-biased-algorithms-and-moderation-are-censoring-activists-on-soci al-media-160669 Meta (2021) Governent request for user data | Transparency Centre. Transparency.fb.com . Retrieved from https://transparency.fb.com/data/government-data-requests/.

Add a comment ...

Post

Maas, B. (2021). Turkey's President Erdogan says social media is a threat to democracy, demands more censorship. Reclaim The Net. Retrieved 21 December 2021, from https://reclaimthenet.org/turkeys-president-erdogan-demands-more-censorship/. Neuman, L. (2012). Basics of Social Research: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches (3rd ed.). Pearson. Nations, D. (2021). What is Facebook. life wire.Retrieved from https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-facebook-3486391. Omnicore., 63 Facebook Statistics You Need to Know in 2021. Omnicoreagency.com. (2021). Retrieved 20 December 2021, from https://www.omnicoreagency.com/facebook-statistics/. Oberlo (2021)., 10 Social Media Statistics You Need to Know in 2021 [Infographic]. Au. Oberlo.com. (2021). Porter, J. (2021). TikTok is making it easier for creators to answer their fans’ questions. The Verge. Retrieved from https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/5/22315055/tiktok-questions-and-answers-qa-feature-live-pre-recorded. Schueller, S. (2021). Marketing Collateral: What Is It and Examples | Widen. Widen.com. Retrieved 21 December 2021, from https://www.widen.com/blog/marketing-collateral. Statistica. (2021).Daily social media usage worldwide | Statista. Retrieved from http://www.statista.com/statistics/43387/daily-social -media-worldwide/ STEGNER, B. (2021). What Is Instagram and How Does It Work?. Make use of. Retrieved from https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/what-is-instagram-how-does-instagram-work/. Twitter. Twitter. (2006). Retrieved 21 December 2021, from https://twitter.com/home. Twitter. (2020). Removal Request- Twitter Transoarency Centre. Transparency. Twitter.com. Retrieved from https://nation.com.pk/27-Nov-2017/activists-assail-blanket-ban-on-social-media. TAPIA, A. (2021). 15 Most Popular Social Media Sites of the Last 10 Years. News Week. Retrieved from https://www.newsweek.com/15-most-popular-social-media-sites-facebook-tiktok-whatsapp-1627665. Wallace Foundation. (2021). Workbook E: Conducting Indepth Interviews. New York: Wallace Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Workbook-E-Indepth-Interviews.pdf Warraich, F. (2017). Activists assail blanket ban on social media. The Nation 2021. Retrieved from https://nation.com.pk/27-Nov-2017/activists-assail-blanket-ban-on-social-media. Whamond, D. (2021). Facebook flow of misinformation. Cagle.com. Retrieved 30 November 2021, from https://www.cagle.com/dave-whamond/2021/10/facebook-flow-of-misinformation. York, A. (2020). How to Analyze Twitter Data. Sprout Social. Retrieved 21 December 2021, from https://sproutsocial.com/insights/twitter-data/. Yuan, E. (2012). Zoom Video Application [Windows]. Zoom. 7amleh releases its Quarterly Report of Palestinian Digital Rights Violations - ‫ ةلمح‬- ‫مالعإلا ريوطتل يبرعلا زكرملا‬ ‫يعامتجالا‬. (2021). Retrieved 21 December 2021, from https://7amleh.org/2021/12/08/7amleh-releases-its-quarterly-report-of-palestinian-digital-rights-violations.

Add a comment ...

Post

Consultation Report on Social Media Censorship

Articles inside

Background Information

Appendices

Conclusion

Findings

Introduction

Method

Data Management

Re ections