On the other hand, another purpose of these algorithms is detecting harmful material on the internet. Information about crimes, child pornography, terrorists’ meeting, are subjected to cyber security. Nowadays, automated censorship on the internet has a crucial role in maintaining our safety life, in spite of its risk for violating privacy.
The dilemma between public virtue and liberty of expression has repeatedly discussed recently. I wrote a couple of examples happened previously.
My past entry: Banning of Google account due to instant upload
My past entry: Banned account case of Instagram for child porn
An incident regarding censorship by Facebook occurred recently. It was relevant to a world-famous photography. It was a photo of Vietnam War taken in 1972 by Nick Ut. In the photography, several people were running to evade from bombing. This photo won the Pulitzer Prize, as describing the misery of war.
On this photo, there was a naked girl running with screaming. Her name is Phan Thi Kim Phuc, a citizen of Tran Band, South Vietnam. She was seriously injured by bombing, but got saved her life. Afterwards, she contributed to reporting the agony of war, and seated a UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador.
Indeed you can see her bare breast and genital. This fact conflicted with the policy of Facebook. It requested this photo deleted from a Facebook post. Espen Egil Hansen, the editor-in-chief of Norway's largest newspaper made a question to Facebook’s decision. He warned that mechanical exclusion of images including sexual contents without any deliberate consideration would lead to denying of mutual communication of humans.
International Business Times: Mark Zuckerberg lambasted over Facebook's censorship of Pulitzer Prize-winning 'napalm girl' photo
There is some point of discussion on this issue. Firstly, there is no doubt that the photo of “napalm girl” is not a child porn. Many people admire its value as an art. Nonetheless, if Phan Thi Kim Phuc herself wanted the photo deleted, her will would be respected. In this case, she seems to accept the importance of this image as a historic record. Considering these facts, it is inappropriate for Facebook to demand the photo to be deleted.
On the other hand, I guess that his comment is partially derived from impatience to the current situation in which Facebook and other social media are overwhelming conventional media. Social media are emerging field compared to the newspaper. Several issues about the policy how to utilize them are still under discussion. Editors of traditional media are willing to adopt their regulation to social media. But, there is a considerable difference between them in many aspects. It is uncertain that we should adhere to conventional rules also in using social media.
The third issue is the period of judgment. Modern society is much more strict to regulate child porn. If this photo had been published in the 21st century, it would not have been approved but identified as inappropriate to be published, I guess. Facebook’s policy is so quite modern that it potentially misjudges the value of objects created in the past.
In the digital age, we have to rely on the computer more or less to distinguish right and wrong. Continuous discussion to keep the standard optimal is needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment