Freedom of speech is a human right.
It is the right to express one’s ideas and opinions verbally or in writing, either publicly or privately.
It is the right to engage in public conversation about personal and public issues and events.
It is the right to communicate meaningfully with other people.
Even so, it has it’s ethical limitations.
All individuals have freedom of speech. It is not just the domain of one person, or one group.
This means that the right is also accompanied by the responsibility of listening to, and responding thoughtfully to, the ideas and opinions of others. Freedom of speech is a two way street.
It is not the right to cause harm or injury to other people.
It is not the right to incite violence.
It is not the right to abuse, slander, or misrepresent situations or other people.
It is not the right to spread dangerous disinformation.
It is not the right to break the law or commonly accepted rules.
The people decrying Twitter and Facebook for banning Trump need to understand these things.
When he opened his social media accounts, he agreed to the terms and conditions. Nobody can have those accounts without agreeing to those rules, which clearly state that one cannot use that social media platform to break the law or encourage anyone else to do so. There is a clearly stated warning that infringement of those rules will result in your account being suspended or cancelled.
There is no doubt that these are the rules invoked when the accounts belonging to a range of criminals and terrorists were cancelled in the past. People and governments actively and rightly demanded that this should be the case in response to the manifesto and live streaming of the actions of the Christchurch mosque terrorist, for example.
It is illegal to use social media to promote illegal activity or post offensive material.
Why, then, should Trump not be banned for inciting a riot or encouraging sedition? Why should his followers not be banned for plotting violence and premeditating murder and insurrection?
The clear answer is that they absolutely should.
Anyone using social media to plan or conduct a criminal act should be banned and then prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram have acted rightly.
They have not assaulted anyone’s free speech. It is not censorship. Those on the quiet end of a ban have invited that consequence for themselves.
A Few Home Truths About #FreedomOfSpeech
Tweet
#Rights2021 #SocialMedia
I use a link shortening service so that half the tweet isn’t taken up by an enormous web address or link. Bit.ly is free, so are many others. I use Buffer to schedule my tweets, and it shortens links automatically, so that’s a double win!
For the first time in a long time, I’ve recently abandoned reading a book. I’m usually fairly persistent, but I couldn’t get past the second chapter. It’s so full of basic errors, I’d be giving any of my students who wrote it a D. That book – any book – has no business being for sale on any platform, Indie or otherwise, until it has been properly edited and corrected.
If we want people to believe that Indie books are just as good as traditionally published books, we have to make sure they are. We must edit, and have them edited, as professional authors. We must promote both ourselves and our books as engaging, intelligent, and literate. The example we set on social media is part of that, because that’s where we hope to find readers.
My aim in this post is not to give you every hashtag that writers use, but to provide you with a functional list of the most common, and therefore the most valuable.
WordyNerdBird 