Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - The Right to Use Social Media

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 2, 2019 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

07:19

The Right to Use Social Media

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	So I was watching Jack Dorsey's appearance on Joe Rogan's podcast and it was illuminating to say the least and I found myself kind of warming to Jack in a way even though I realize that he has harmed me personally and many other people that I know and he has a strange way of looking at the world.
	He has a certain set of ideals that he seems to be in no way interested in living up to.
	For example, at one point, Jack Dorsey was asked, do people have a right to use social media?
	Jack believes they do.
	He said without hesitation, everyone has a right to use social media.
	Well, that puts you in a rather awkward position, given how Twitter is well known for banning people, Jack.
	Certain people like myself, in fact.
	But not just me, obviously.
	Lots of different public figures, people who had very sizable followings, and people who were, whether you like it or not, contributing something to the public discourse.
	You've decided that these people aren't appropriate for your platform.
	How did you make that decision?
	If you believe people have a right to use your platform or any social media at all as a fundamental human right, how do you justify banning people?
	You can't say that people have a right to do it and then suppress that right, at least if you have got any interest in being in any way consistent.
	But I don't envy the position Jack's in because like he said in the podcast, Twitter was something that was discovered rather than invented.
	And I think that's true.
	What people are looking for is a way of communicating as quickly as possible.
	And this is just to satisfy the innate desire for things instantaneously.
	People's honestly baser instincts to have something as quickly as possible.
	So the question Jack Dorsey has to ask himself is by what standard is this judged?
	He wants to do it by conduct, which is fine, but then you run into a whole slew of people that have been banned for conduct that isn't really outside of the bounds of normal discourse, but really they've been banned for what they've said.
	So for their speech and not their actual conduct.
	So this is an inherent contradiction that Jack's going to have to explain away to everyone.
	But more importantly, what do you do about the concept of ostracization?
	Because that's the main problem that Jack has, and all of the tech companies have, is what they're doing is saying that we hold the moral authority to ostracize someone from the public dialogue.
	Honestly, I don't think you do.
	I don't think you are authorities in this way.
	And I think that is something that you guys can't fully justify.
	And if you even try to, you'll find yourself getting into a giant labyrinth of moral conundrums.
	And you know this, and I know you know this, especially given how the amount of studies and the amount of work you guys must have done to figure out that Twitter itself, especially Twitter, but probably the other social media platforms, are forms of addiction.
	And this is something that Jack has contributed to.
	And not only is it a form of addiction, it's also a form of creating vast online echo chambers where people are becoming increasingly more radical.
	And this is something that the social media platforms, they're all aware of.
	So what do you do?
	Now, Jack Dorsey's suggestion that you don't follow people, you follow topics is actually a really good one.
	I think that would definitely help because then you get all sides of the discussion within a topic.
	Excellent suggestion.
	And honestly, Twitter should move to that model as soon as possible.
	Because at the moment, what you have is a kind of Twitter aristocracy that you're busy creating, using verified check marks, and you know that they feel this way about it, Jack.
	But getting back to the point of who has a right to use social media?
	Everyone.
	Okay, that's fine.
	Let's assume that fundamentally everyone does have a right to use social media.
	You are going to have to effectively create your own 12 laws of Twitter.
	And you're going to have to set it up on a big stone tablet and say, this is the line.
	This is something that everyone can understand.
	Because the problem that you have, Jack, is that most of this is done very subjectively.
	A second problem that you have is that this is all being done, aside from the fact it's being done, frankly, arbitrarily, and in a way that allows nothing for what one could describe as justice.
	It also offers no path to redemption.
	When you ban someone from your platforms, you are saying you have been a problem for us and you will always be a problem for us.
	We are in fact anathematizing you.
	We are censoring you for what you are.
	And as far as we're concerned, you will be this thing forever.
	Is that what you want to do to people?
	Is that wise?
	I mean, I'm of the opinion that ostracization leads to radicalization.
	I think people become more moderate the more they interact with other people who disagree with them.
	The more they are given the opportunity to find out why the other person believes what they believe, the more likely they are to incorporate that and interpret that and alter their own state of being, their own state of mind based on that.
	And what you're doing, Jack, is saying, no, you are permanently a problem person.
	You will always be this and there is no route to redemption.
	Is that just?
	Is that moral?
	Is that wise?
	And that's the question that you're struggling with.
	And honestly, I think you're going to have to do something like that.
	If you genuinely believe that people have a right to use social media, then you are going to have to give them a way to find justice.
	Because that's what this will come down to.
	If you think that your platforms are the new social, the new town square, the new public arena in which people talk, how do you justify keeping anyone out of it?
	You would have to, you have to really have a long, hard think about this, Jack.
	But I think that this goes for all social media companies.
	If you truly believe that people do have a right to use social media, and honestly, I'm with you.
	I believe that too.
	You're going to have to give people a path to redemption.
	You're going to have to give them a way of serving their time, performing some kind of labor or whatever it is that you decide in your terms and conditions.
	And you have to give people an option to reform.
	Because if you don't, you're going to find yourself with more and more enemies.
	People who find themselves increasingly bitter and resentful at you personally.
	And I'm saying this in the context of the terrible things that have already happened.
	YouTube has already had a mass shooter because of the demonetization program that they've had.
	I mean, if you think this isn't something that people take very seriously, you're wrong.
	But I know you know that.
	And if you think that this isn't something that is just going to get worse and not better by your policy of choosing someone you don't like and ostracizing them from your platform, that's going to make things worse as well.
	This isn't a threat from me, it's a warning, it's a prediction.
	This is me saying you need to find a way of actually making your platforms inclusive.
	Because I know you value that.

▲