Speech Theories - Human Liberty & Freedom of Speech

The First Amendment protects our freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is defined by Google as the
right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint. Freedom of speech covers more than just talking aloud. This includes the right not to speak, to use certain offensive words and phrases to convey a political message, to contribute money to political campaigns, and to engage in symbolic speech. 

In today's world, we have a new version of "speech" that congress has not covered. It is a difficult and unique situation in the 21st century. Social media is today's newest form of communication that reaches many people within minutes. Even though the First Amendment protects our right to speak, social media censors what we are not allowed to say. 

Most social media platforms have a set of guidelines that you are required to accept before using the app. These guidelines contain information about minor safety, bullying, harassment, copyright material, and violence. Of course, it's important to try to protect each other online, but how far is too far?

TikTok allows users to mute certain words or phrases in their comments to prevent inappropriate texts. Does this go against freedom of speech? Or is it okay because it's a privately owned application that individuals download freely? It may seem to violate the First Amendment, however, because of the guidelines against harassment, these acts are protected. 

Last year, former United States president Donald Trump tried suing Facebook, Google, and Twitter in a class action lawsuit for banning him on their platforms. While he deems this action unconstitutional, they reason that Congress cannot lawfully encourage private persons to censor speech if Congress is constitutionally forbidden from doing the same thing. Because Facebook, Google, and Twitter are private companies, they cannot violate the first amendment. Trump tried to argue that social media companies have increased from private status to "state actor" status, however, that point didn't help him in this particular case. 

Personally, I have faced censorship on social media and felt like it was a violation of my First Amendment rights. I often create my own content and post on Instagram and TikTok as an influencer. Posting frequently has opened my eyes to what is considered to follow "community guidelines" and what does not. If I try to post a video in a cropped shirt or bikini like many other influencers, my video is removed. This seems unfair because others can post what I cannot, however, TikTok uses terms like "minor safety" and claims to remove the content for other safety reasons. The users that get away with posting freely are the same people who have millions of followers.

 Although I'm not physically saying anything in the video, I believe the message still speaks for itself. I think creating content is a form of expressing yourself. This form of symbolic speech through self-expression is why it follows under the First Amendment and more specifically freedom of speech. 

As a U.S. citizen, it's part of my duty to speak up when I feel my rights are being taken. On social media, there is only so much you can do to try to stop censorship. You can appeal a video and deem it to follow the guidelines but you still have to wait for the platform to accept it. It's a difficult situation and there isn't really any single individual with who you can email or try to communicate about it. 

I believe to fix censorship on social media, someone should be put in charge of that position. Each company should have someone who deals with censoring others online and try to avoid it at all costs. As long as there is no hate speech, harassment, or bullying going on, there is no valid reason for removing the content.