Government Restricted Social Media

Government Restricted Social Media

by -

By Mark Molina

Everyone knows that social media is a way of life nowadays and that most people will find out a good amount of the world’s news on Facebook or Twitter, first.

Not only find out about it, but also obtain opinions of others that may or may not mix things up a little bit.

On January 28 the Egyptian government shut off all internet access and suspended cell phone service in efforts to stop anti -government protestors from forming and organizing.

Seeing the results in Egypt has caused officials of the British government to look into gaining control of social networking in order to calm the rioting that the UK has experienced recently.

The problem is trying to get the owners of Twitter, Facebook, or Blackberry Messenger to cooperate with the government in the limiting process voluntarily in order to avoid the obvious censorship and hypocrisy that comes along with it.

Of course they cannot completely shut off all network access, so the most they can hope for is limiting access and restricting what parts of the country have access.

British Prime Minister, David Cameron spoke to Parliament and what was discussed was to only act when they know that something criminal or dangerous is being plotted.

So is this good?

Does social media really make government that helpless to the point that the must treat the country like children in an effort to gain order?

Just look at the way social media works. How many times have you gone to a newsfeed on a social network and have seen posts about happenings in the world followed by smart remarks or personalized calls to action.

I urge you to look at those posts and see how many different people have commented or ‘liked’ that particular status in an effort to acknowledge what they have in common.

It may feel good to see someone share your interest and force them to be less passive about the cause and take action.

You now have a couple of angry people organizing online with similar interest and you find the cause has spread across the country.

Still, you can try and call these efforts by foreign governments just lazy or panicky, seeing how they can even consider something of this nature

If governments see the problem in keeping the use of networking, why can’t they see it as a tool to prevent riots or at least minimize the uprising?

Either way you look at it, you still get the feeling that your human rights are in some way being violated.

Why radicalize things and try to make them worse?

If anything you’ll make the ones who organize angry, force more face-to-face communication in the streets and inform those who may not have been interested in the issue.

Riot or no, people in all countries still have the rights to their social media.

Why?

They are people who have voices for their well-being, not your rebellious teenage daughter.

SIMILAR ARTICLES

Dakota Roberts">

Sebastyon Spencer">

Sierra Zavala">

Dakota Roberts">