I know I am only an armchair warrior, but I have lived long enough to say I have never experienced a war like this. Since the start of the Israel-Hamas war on the 7th of October, it has not been confined to jet fighters and tanks but has taken a form all of its own. It is a war of words, emotions, blame, and counterclaims that are mostly unsubstantiated, lack reason, and are littered with opinions void of intellectual substance. We are getting carried away by the emotion of the occasion.
Not only in the physical world, but this war has taken over the virtual world like a hurricane. Social Media is abuzz with rumours, abuse, and misinformation. More than likely, it will be won or lost on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and TikTok. YouTube, Photoshop and imaging AI have never had it so good. Unsuspecting, our posts give their CEOs the power to regulate us without liability. We forget Social media is funded through trading personal data to advertisers. Algorithms categorise opinions, and that personal data is then used to target users with information, or disinformation, tailored to their personality” – in other words, to send people content which is centred on ideas they already agree with. Ideas are reaffirmed rather than challenged; accordingly, social media groups are affirmed in their apparent objective truth. This affirmation increases hostility when those groups are exposed to those who do not share their view.
Sharing has taken on a new dimension. In this war, it is not to amuse or help others; it gives us status and makes us feel important because we are in the know, even as we give away our identity. Yes, sharing connects us to the world and shapes how we perceive it. No fear or possible bias could stop it; pivoting on one word in a headline could affect our emotions, which decide which side we are on in this war. Physical violence on our streets is not far behind, perpetrated by these platforms. Unfortunately, they are not a source of progress.
Here we are; we thought only bombs could hurt us. For instance, the Christchurch gunman in New Zealand, not long ago, had spent years on social media trying to advance the cause of white power. He eventually decided his social media posts were not enough; now it was "time to make a real-life effort post." He murdered 51 people. The repercussions mean we are not safe anywhere; the war on our street would continue long after the shelling stops.
There are no sides or causes to consider, neither toleration nor moderation. There is no in-between but total and absolutist blame. Governments, the press, and the rest of the world are divided between East and West; each side blames the other, even for atrocities committed by the other. The word 'counter' is everywhere—counter-blame, counter-proof, counter-pro, counter-statement, and all the Counter you can think of. 'Viral' is not far behind. It is not fashionable to be moderate or compromising, and remaining silent is not an option.
Free speech is paramount to the value of Democracy; it was supposed to bring out the truth, but it is morally bankrupt in this war. It has taken a hammering in the virtual space of the internet; Democracy is morphing into totalitarianism. Worse, we see it replaced by distortion and lies online; both could lead to backlash and possible reprisals.
And it is spreading. Since October 7, more than 150 companies and leading Brands have made statements condemning Hamas’s attacks on Israel. Those with branch offices in Israel have taken pages in the press to advertise the fact. Some employees and customers now expect or demand that companies speak out on social issues and take a stand. They are expected to go public on Social Media. This would inevitably create an environment where employees with different opinions are barred from deviating from that position. It also puts heavy pressure on companies and employees to carefully navigate the tricky terrain in their public statements as the war continues. And again, falling in the middle is not an option. Viewpoint diversity and individuality are not applauded but are vilified and attacked. Consequently, social media can easily collapse into a marketplace filled not with ideas but with intellectual thuggery.
In this jungle of posts, the truth is getting lost. The constant bombardment of videos and articles does not distinguish between truth value and emotional response. The primary objective is to compete in the popularity contest. Emotional content is easier to understand and connect with, and it dominates digital platforms. The urge to generate emotional reactions and seek approval from followers and friends pushes intellectual debate to the margins. The legitimacy of these posts is given by the number of 'shares' or 'likes', so the search for truth becomes irrelevant. Attention-grabbing is the driver, so the ideal intention of free speech to seek knowledge gets lost on social media. Moreover, Ideas are global, and the sheer size of social media makes it impossible to search for the truth. Amid this polluted content, it is also impossible to have any meaningful discussion about the validity of this war.
False posts on social media can quickly gain attention and spread widely, strengthening the voices that spread misinformation. They can deceive and mislead individuals, distorting their perceptions of reality and shaping public opinion based on incorrect or manipulated information, drowning out accurate information and creating a distorted narrative. Moreover, false posts on social media platforms might discourage people from exercising free speech, especially if they fear backlash or becoming targets of online harassment because of their views. This chilling effect can hinder open and diverse dialogue.
Censorship is undemocratic and has no grounds in Liberal thinking, where even racists have rights. No censor can perfectly filter out truth from falsehood; doing so only suppresses ideas, which can kill individual thought. We all have the right to drive a car, so we all have the right to pollute the air. Moreover, we relish commanding a 'like' on our unchecked posts, whether we unsuspectingly echo fibs or misinformation. The most important thing is popularity. Social media was prophesied as a digital leap in democratic speech, a marketplace of ideas or a source of communication; sadly, it is no longer.
On an individual level, self-discipline is essential; we either become more discerning and learn media literacy or rely on fact-checking websites or organisations that investigate and verify the accuracy of claims in news and other sources. For example, the CRAAP test (Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, Purpose) can be used to assess the quality and reliability of information.
On the other hand, especially in this war, censorship is required to prevent forms of hate speech that target marginalised communities, which may need to be restricted to maintain social harmony and ensure equal participation of all citizens in public discourse. Striking a balance between protecting individuals from harm and preserving free speech is crucial. It is evident from the fact that Antisemitic hate crime has continued to soar in London, with 408 offences recorded so far this October, compared with 28 in the same period last year. Islamophobic hate crime is also on the rise, up from 65 offences last October to 174 so far this month.
When the guns fall silent, the war of words continues. It is crucial, however, to strike a balance between combating misinformation and preserving the democratic values of free speech and diverse opinions. Achieving this balance requires ongoing dialogue, learning, and continuous improvement from social media platforms, as well as active engagement from users and society as a whole. And in this war, only History will adjudicate this quagmire of truth and unsubstantiated claims and bring justice to the victims.
1 comment:
What an excellent article, full of deep considerations, sparks of controversy, but a mass of reality and truth.
Post a Comment