Facebook should be regulated as it acts as an informal news media

Facebook should be regulated as it acts as an informal news media

The world of social media and communication has really improved, and more people can enjoy the services. More companies are coming up with better, modern, and accessible applications while the established organizations are improving on their services. Facebook is the most populated platform in the contemporary generation. Virtually all people with a smartphone or computer access in the world has had, currently has or will have a Facebook account in the future. With the type of popularity that the company enjoys, so is the call for responsibility. The CEO of the company, Mark Zuckerberg, has been questioned both in informal and formal interviews, and US Congress, about the readiness and systems of data protection in the company. The call for regulation in the company comes from the fact that data of people in the company has leaked or been hacked on several instances. The debate revolves as they are informal news sites and because the information of people in private, however, the primary source of information is voluntary, and the informal status allows people to express their opinions.

Facebook should be regulated as it acts as an informal news media. Facebook has become a platform where news is shared; thus, it is believed as facts by many people. As a columnist in the New Yorker explains, “This strategy of claiming not to be the media has worked well for Facebook” (Gessen). That is, the ability of the company to remain as a non-news site has allowed the regulation to be passed. However, it is evident that the information passed on the site is influential in educating people both politically and economically. The aspect of information and responsibility is expressed by an author in the Atlantic based on the role of the company in the voter registration campaign (Meyer). The platform influences the reception and obtaining of news like traditional news channels; thus; it should be regulated to ensure only eligible news is passed on the site.

Facebook should also be regulated based on the company’s access to private information. The use of mobile phones ensures that all information is stored in the cloud. Facebook has a large database of people’s location, family information, names, social security details, and profound opinions. All this data can be used for different reasons. An example presented by a New Yorker author is that of, “Cambridge Analytica had harvested the personal information of more than fifty million Facebook users and offered it to clients, including the Trump campaign” (Menand). The example expresses the different ways in which Facebook has accumulated immense data over time, which can be used to harm or influence the opinions of the users.

On the other hand, Facebook should not be regulated as information on the platform is presented by the users who have the option to share or not. In that, the data offered on family, life, jobs, and opinions on brands is offered willingly. As an author and editor with the New Republic explains, “this desire to know and perfect ourselves, and posits the rather animalistic idea that we forget our broader freedoms for the sake of small doses of social interaction, which give us pleasure” (Renner). The constant need of people to be accepted, be enlightened of new trends, and remain relevant in the society has led to the continuous addition of information into the site. People are responsible for giving Facebook their data; otherwise, one can delete their account. Therefore, instead of regulating Facebook, people should regulate what they upload.

Facebook should not be regulated as it is a platform of self-expression and opinion-presentation. Unlike the mass media such as news sites, Facebook allows users to write their raw data on things encountered and experienced in life. According to an article published in 2018, “Facebook sees local news as an opportunity to push community-building and more positive content” (Shephard). In that, the local community is expected to interact and express their opinions on specific aspects of society. The regulation of the medium results in the censoring of the public opinion, thus impacting the freedom of the users. As content creators and users on the site, it is critical to be given the space to explore and express beliefs.

I believe that Facebook should be regulated. As a company that has enormous access to information and a market, such as the campaigning candidates, thus it is critical to be responsible for the data they are given. Similarly, the aspect of freedom of speech should be regulated on the platform based on the impact that the data presented on the sites possesses. As a company, corporate social responsibility is to ensure that no hate crimes, bullying, and other forms of negative social behavior are allowed through content creation. Facebook is a hub for news and social interaction; thus, regulating the platform will ensure the social and personal satisfaction of the users is achieved as they are assured of their privacy and news.

The debate on the regulation of Facebook has been on the public space in the recent past and current times. One side claim that the social platform should be regulated as it acts as a source of news, and data privacy is essential. On the other hand, personal involvement in the data presentation and freedom of speech goes against the aspect of regulation. As a corporate, the same concepts of social responsibilities apply. Therefore, control is essential for the social platform. Regulating Facebook presents sanity and transparency for the users, thus creating trust between the users and the company.