When I think of media laws, the first thing that comes to mind is the lengthy jargon contained in the seemingly endless terms and conditions of our favorite social networks and websites.
The act of ignoring all of the legalese and scrolling down to hit that “agree” button is so ubiquitous that it’s often been meme-ified. To many, it’s just another post-modern joke about how complicated the digital landscape has become.
In one of this week’s articles on privacy, Jeffrey Toobin was referenced as saying, “In Europe, the right to privacy trumps freedom of speech; the reverse is true in the United States.”
While we live in a world where data, not oil, is our most valuable resource, many Americans continue to trade their privacy to places like Facebook for the sake of using their platform to exercise their right to free speech. The implications of this reality, however, are profound.
The Netflix documentary, The Great Hack, provides a look into the delicate balance of privacy and freedom of speech. The film dives into the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal and features David Carroll, a college professor who filed a suit to gain access to his data used by the firm.
Spoiler alert: he doesn’t get his data back.
Both the scandal itself and the fact that private data like this is so heavily guarded by companies like Facebook allow us to glimpse the consequences of sacrificing our privacy on the altar of the first amendment.
Unfortunately, allowing privacy to trump free speech is also equally as troubling in many ways. While the circulation of genuinely fake news that perpetuates falsehoods is troubling, proposing legal consequences for fake news is just as concerning. As we discussed in our lecture this week, just because something is offensive or wrong doesn’t mean it should be illegal.
While some are calling for censorship of this type of content, we must take into account the fact that norms and laws are not the same. While “fake news” may not be illegal, there may still be social consequences. Just as it’s not illegal to tell off your boss, you still have to endure the result of being fired.
As I’ve become increasingly more aware of the complexities of how the law impacts media, I’ve also changed many of my online behaviors, particularly on social networks. One primary example of this is a decision my husband and I have made regarding our future children.
While many parents use Facebook and Instagram to share photos of their children on the internet, we have decided that when we have children, we won’t post pictures of their faces for the world to see. This is certainly out of the ordinary, though we want to give our children the ability to craft and curate their reputations online once they’re old enough to do so rather than be handed an online presence that’s been in existence since before they were old enough to consent.
As Professor Gillmor stated in our lecture this week, everything on the internet is permanent. As our society struggles with the balance between privacy and freedom of speech, I hope that we can keep this truth at the forefront of our minds.
