Category: The Word

Social Media and the 1st Amendment

by Simran Jayasinghe

In light of recent events, the discussion of the 1st Amendment rights of free speech and social media has been put in the spotlight. Some say that under the 1st Amendment, some social media companies’ decisions to ban accounts violates their right to free speech and is unconstitutional. But do our rights under the 1st Amendment include things like rights to have social media accounts and express our views on social media?

The short answer is no. The first amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” A lot is packed into that first amendment as it covers freedom of religion, free speech, as well as the right to peacefully protest and petition the government with grievances. but the part we are looking for is this clause: “…or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;…”. This refers to freedom of speech and press, stating that the government cannot make laws that prohibit the people’s free speech and the free speech of the press. The important detail that some people tend to miss is at the beginning of the 1st amendment, “Congress shall make no law…”. This means that the first amendment only addresses what the government cannot do to encroach on the people’s rights. Social media companies are private companies (not affiliated with the government), and therefore their actions do not fall under the first amendment. 

Now that we know the first amendment says nothing about your rights on social media, your next question might be, “Is there anything social media companies say that specify people’s rights on social media?”. Let’s think about what happens when you make a social media account for a second. After selecting your username and password, you are required to check the box that says “I agree to ______’s Terms and Conditions”, or the same message is in small print somewhere on that page. You do this every time you make an account on virtually every online service, social media or not (Amazon, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Pinterest, Google, Discord, Parler, etc). These terms and conditions can cover a wide range of things from minimum age to use the service to copyright rules and other legal safeguards. Whether most people actually read the terms and conditions before accepting them when making accounts and signing up for services is a discussion for a different post, but for the people that don’t, they can also (almost always) be found on the company’s website. For the current issue of whether social media companies can take down content that people post, I have attached the screenshots below of a paragraph from Twitter’s Terms of Service page, ‘Content on the Services’ section, and from the ‘Ending These Terms’ section.

From Twitter’s Terms of Service page, ‘Content on the Services’ section
From Twitter’s Terms of Service page, ‘Ending These Terms’ section

This means that everyone that has an account on Twitter agreed to following these Terms of Service when making their account, and legally, Twitter is within their rights to regulate what accounts post (when they have reasons to deem it necessary). Most social media companies have similar terms, although they do vary slightly from platform to platform.

It is also important to note that the right to freedom of speech under the law does not cover the right to say or do things that would or do cause harm to others. It is not considered freedom of speech to shout “fire” in a crowded theatre when there is no fire, because not only is it untrue, it creates a situation in which multiple others can be harmed. In summary, the first amendment protects the people’s rights against the government, not private companies, which means it plays no part in what social media companies can do, and legally, everyone using social media platforms have contracts that specify what the company can and cannot do.

Why has global warming become a political discussion?

by Simran Jayasinghe

Global warming is an issue that effects everyone in some way. If you live in areas that are at or below sea level, sea level rise is slowly affecting where you live. For example, the country of Bangladesh has one of the largest deltas, which makes it extremely susceptible to flooding due to rise in sea levels. Some scientists believe that in addition to rising sea levels, the increasing intensity of natural disasters such as hurricanes or cyclones might also be a side effect of global warming. People have a hard time making decisions about preventing global warming because it involves lifestyle changes, and the effects of global warming aren’t seen by everyone on a daily basis. 

In 1987, the Montreal Protocol, which banned and phased out CFCs as well as other chemicals that were harmful to the ozone layer, and was unanimously agreed upon by all the countries in the UN. People felt the need to make this decision because the health effects uv radiation has on humans was clear to everyone and was an immediate concern. It also helped that big lifestyle or economic changes were not needed. Unfortunately, there hasn’t been a decision made with this level of urgency about global warming. Perhaps because the effects of global warming are less directly related to our health, and happen slowly, they are easier to overlook. People are also less willing to make big lifestyle changes, which are needed to reduce global warming.

Some changes, such as having more fuel-efficient transportation, are being made easier over time, with new technology. Other changes are easier for people to incorporate into their day to day lives, such as using less plastic, recycling, wasting less food, and eating less meat. 

Despite the overwhelming amount of scientific evidence showing the cause and impact of global warming, whether someone believes in it or not seems to have become a big political discussion. Especially in the U.S, where decision about global warming seem to be influenced by the political party to which one belongs to. A popular argument by some groups is that global warming isn’t 100% proven. This is because, in science, nothing can be proven. Science can provide evidence for the fact that the rise in global temperatures is due to man made increase in CO2 in our atmosphere. However, some groups say that since science cannot prove global warming, it isn’t an urgent problem, and doesn’t require attention. I think that in order to move forward with efforts to reduce the impact of global warming, science needs to take the lead instead of politics. 

Are We Losing The Art Of Civilized Debate?

by Kiran Jayasinghe

I remember watching news channels when I was a few years younger and always seeing both sides of a conversation. News shows would bring in both sides to talk about a topic. Today, I see one side agreeing with itself and bashing the other side instead of having an open conversation between them. Wether about politics or emotions or business, the art of civilized debate is being lost.

What is civilized debate? Some people call it polite disagreement, or polite discussion. It’s the art of being able to have a conversation where two sides disagree and are able to contemplate ideas in an environment focused on learning.

To have a civilized discussion, it is important to understand the other side first. If you don’t know what you’re arguing against, you can’t get your point effectively across and you’re not understanding where the other side is coming from. Conversations with my friends and family can sometimes turn into arguments when we don’t communicate effectively. When we finally listen to each other and consider the other side’s reasoning, we can have a more productive debate and eventually learn more.

It’s also important to keep the idea and the person voicing the idea separate. If somebody voices an opinion or thought that disagrees with yours, it doesn’t mean the person is ‘bad’. It just means that a conversation about the idea is even more important and that an opportunity to discuss the idea and why it is wrong is even more prevalent. 

In society today, wether on social media or within my friend’s conversations, I see the unwillingness to understand the other side. The only goal in a discussion today seems to prevail as the ‘right’ one or the winner. We don’t take the time to understand why the other person may be thinking this way, or what the purpose of the argument is. 

I also see when the relationship between the idea and the person is blurred. If somebody speaks about something in our society, they can’t voice an idea without being bound to it. If the idea is disagreed with or considered to be wrong, the person is punished (i.e cancel culture). I think this societal mechanism doesn’t help as much as we think it does. Punishing somebody for having a wrong opinion and not allowing them to grow from the conversation can destroy a society from the inside out. Unless, of course, it’s one of the topics that have a definitive wrong side: topics like racism or things that involve hatred of others.

As a society, our pride is our downfall. Our minds are open to the idea that we are right, and closed to the possibility that we can be wrong. Conversations are meant to stimulate productivity instead of suffocating communication. If we cannot listen to opposing views because we are so involved in being right, the discussion becomes about winning instead of learning. What would society be like if we were able to learn from civilized debate?

The Internet has made Everybody an Expert

by Simran Jayasinghe

During the ongoing pandemic, I have noticed that people do not want to listen to public health officials. For example, a lot of people don’t want to social distance, or wear masks when they go out, even though there is a lot of scientific evidence that these measures reduce the spread of the virus. Public health officials continually try to convey the importance of wearing a mask in public, and staying at least 6 feet apart from strangers, yet we still see pictures of crowded beaches and cases keep climbing.

I think this is partly because the Internet has made everyone feel like they’re an expert on everything, including COVID-19. With a quick internet search, you can bring up thousands of results on a given topic. The internet can give you info on anything from how to build a bookshelf, or cook food, to information on COVID-19. There is a lot of information because anyone can post on the internet, experts and non-experts alike. Having a lot of information can be great if you want to read multiple different restaurant reviews to see where you want to eat, but is not as helpful when you want to find information on COVID-19. It is important that people know how to tell when a source is reliable, and when facts are good or not. Another important thing to remember when reading articles on the Internet, is that you can read about people’s various opinions, and facts. I came across an article from NPR about how the internet is making people experts, that was published in 2007, but is still, if not more relevant today, in light of the recent pandemic. In the age of the internet, it is important to check the place you are getting your information from, because not everyone on the internet is necessarily educated in what they are writing about. Nowadays, anyone can easily get a domain name, build a website, and start posting information.

I don’t know what it was like before the Internet, but my dad says that before the Internet, people asked their teachers, doctors, and health officials for information, or went to a library and read published, peer-reviewed books. Since we can all get information on the Internet quickly, from the phones we all have in our hands, people think that what they read on the internet can be more important than what public health officials say. It is also easy for people to only look at information that agrees with their point of view, and make an information bubble for themselves. For example, if you only follow one news channel, you are most likely only going to hear news that favors a certain viewpoint, and that is usually going to be the viewpoint you suscribe to. The Internet is overall, an amazing resource, but in the time of a pandemic, can bring up problems. 

NPR Article:  https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15671312

College After Covid-19

by Kiran Jayasinghe

The novel coronavirus has changed all of our lifestyles, from work to sports to school. My swim team has just resumed practices after three months of quarantine. My dad holds all his meetings at home, just a few feet away from where I do my online school Since I was already homeschooled, corona hasn’t changed much in terms of education for me. But I think it will continue to effect our education system in the years to come, and I wonder if I’ll have the same college experience in a few years that a traditional college student would have had.

If we don’t have a vaccine for Corona virus by the time I get to college, then we’ll still need to take preventative measures to keep ourselves safe from infection. This means schools will need to have some form of social distancing, which may even include remote online learning. I’ve been homeschooled for my entire life, so while online learning won’t be hard, the college experience — debates with classmates, study groups and group assignments, team sports — might not be a reality for me.

Even if we have a vaccine, the way we learn could change.  University and colleges may find online teaching to be more cost effective and switch to using tools like virtual reality goggles and other online resources. More schools may abandon the traditional schedule and lean towards more asynchronous classes, giving students less of the normal college experience.

And since online learning poses challenges to students and may not be the first choice for many people, going to college could be less of a priority for some. This may lead to less enrollment, which means budget cuts in schools or higher prices for students (or both). If Coronavirus is still at large by the time I go to college, the education experience we have now may not exist.