Should social media be regulated to prevent misinformation?
This undergraduate-level argumentative essay in English, formatted in MLA citation style, examines whether regulating social media can curb misinformation while balancing public welfare and free speech. The essay example evaluates the role of regulation in public health, democratic integrity, and critical thinking, while addressing censorship concerns to propose a balanced approach that fosters a secure yet free digital environment. This analysis by our argumentative essay writer provides valuable insights for policymakers, media professionals, and society at large on the complex trade-offs between freedom of expression and societal safety in today’s digital landscape.
Octobre 28, 2024
* The sample essays are for browsing purposes only and are not to be submitted as original work to avoid issues with plagiarism.
1
Sudent’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Should Social Media be Regulated to Prevent Misinformation?
Introduction
Living in the modern digitized world, one has to cope with social media as a significant
channel of news, communication, and means of self-expression. Yet, the openness of the
platform turns it into a breeding ground for misinformation or a place where distortions from
public health to political stability spread fast. Events like this give rise to many questions:
should social media be regulated, or not? Although the latter may be argued to be an
infringement of freedom of speech, the larger society must bear in mind the greater
implications these pieces of unregulated misinformation have. Therefore, social media
regulation to limit misinformation is required to maintain public health, democratic integrity,
and a well-informed public; however, this regulation should be balanced to avoid excessive
censorship.
The rapid dissemination of misinformation on health, particularly when crises like the
COVID-19 pandemic occur, underline the dangers unregulated social media presents. False
claims regarding vaccines, treatments, and other forms of health measures have confused the
public, lowered vaccine take-up, and fueled unnecessary illness and death (Lovari and
Righetti 4). Primarily, vaccination hesitation has directly been caused by misinformation
spread online. Therefore, with limitations, relevant authorities will have the ability to regulate
content that affects public health and, in so doing, reduce harmful misinformation (Lovari
2
and Righetti 4). This will ensure that users receive accurate information from credible sources
and, in turn, improve health outcomes on an international scale.
Furthermore, democracies rely on informed citizens making responsible electoral
choices, but social media has opened easy pathways for foreign and domestic actors to
manipulate public opinion. Examples are misinformation campaigns in various documented
elections around the world, including the U.S. 2016 presidential election (Lovari and Righetti
3). Unregulated platforms allow fake news and divisive content to thrive that mislead voters
and erode confidence in democratic institutions (Lovari and Righetti 3). Regulated
misinformation on social media could provide less impact of such negative campaigns and
better decision-making by people based on facts rather than fabricated narratives.
Lastly, when social media platforms in collaboration with relevant authorities take
steps to limit the spread of false information, they also encourage users to think critically
about the information they encounter online. Indirectly, platforms foster media literacy in
labeling questionable content and encouraging fact-checking practices, whereby users verify
information against an independent, credible source before accepting that information as truth
(Lovari and Righetti 4). Such measures can enhance public understanding and reduce the ease
with which misinformation spreads, as individuals become more discerning consumers of
information.
On the other hand, those opposing the regulation of social media feel that such a
practice may quickly slide into censorship, breaching the rights of free speech. They hold the
view that social media should provide a platform where ideas can be expressed without any
control or even correctness, as people have equal rights to diverse opinions (Soto-Vega et al.
20). While this concern is valid, allowing complete freedom can result in harmful outcomes
when misinformation threatens public safety and democratic values (Soto-Vega et al. 23).
3
Proper regulation, narrowly tailored to factual verifications but not to opinion suppression,
could balance free speech with the public welfare.
Conclusion
While there are challenges with the regulation of social media, it is a step necessary in the
interest of public health, democracy, and critical thinking. The possibility of harm from
unregulated platforms, from misinformation about health issues to interference in democratic
elections, far outweighs the concerns over the limitation of free speech. With responsible
regulation, social media can be what its purpose is for connection and a source of information
without harmful compromise to societal well-being.
4
5
Work Cited
Lovari, Alessandro, and N. Righetti. Pandemic Communication and Problematic
Information. Springer EBooks, vol. 21, no. 2, 2023, pp. 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26825-1_125-1.
Soto-Vega, E., S. G. Gómez, María Fernanda Pérez-Zepeda, and Marielle G. Lesson on
Misinformation in the COVID-19 Era. IntechOpen EBooks, vol. 151, no. 11, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109329.
Octobre 28, 2024
24/7 custom essay writing by real academic writers
WPH
Academic level:
Undergraduate 1-2
Type of paper:
Argumentative essay
Discipline:
English
Citation:
MLA
Pages:
2 (550 words)
* The sample essays are for browsing purposes only and are not to be submitted as original work to avoid issues with plagiarism.
