@ISIDEWITHQuestionsDomestic PolicyStarted 7yrs agoActive 1wk ago

Should the government regulate social media sites, as a means to prevent fake news and misinformation?

In January 2018 Germany passed the NetzDG law which required platforms like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to take down perceived illegal content within 24 hours or seven days, depending on the charge, or risk a fine of €50 million ($60 million) fines. In July 2018 representatives from Facebook, Google and Twitter denied to the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary committee that they censor content for political reasons. During the hearing Republican members of Congress criticized the social media companies for politically motivated practices in removing some content, a charge the…  

Read more
+
Expand
+ Settings

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 20.3k Canada voters.

35%
Yes
65%
No
30%
Yes
51%
No
3%
Yes, there is too much fake news and misinformation on social media
9%
No, the government should not determine what is fake or real news
2%
Yes, social media companies are politically biased and need to be regulated
5%
No, social media companies are private and should not be regulated by the government

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 20.3k Canada voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 20.3k Canada voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Canada voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9HBRBWDfrom Ontario  answered…1yr1Y

The government should not regulate, but make an effort to correct false information. For example, how Facebook places a pop up over a post to warn of possible false information.

 @B3HJK9Rfrom Manitoba  answered…1wk1W

Yes; politically-motivated misinformation/fraud from foreign adversaries is far too prevalent and not well regulated. As well, social media companies should not be allowed to give political donations or lobby for political parties

 @B3FNKL9from Ontario  answered…1wk1W

Yes and no, yes because there’s a huge amount of misinformation but at the same time no because it runs the risk of government propaganda.

 @B3BB9L6from Alberta  answered…2wks2W

No, because if the government controls the media further more, there is more propaganda resulting in total media control

 @B3972KFfrom Ontario  answered…2wks2W

Social media companies should be forced to self regulate and comply with standards set by government

 @B38NWBTfrom Ontario  answered…2wks2W

In theory, yes. But I would be EXTREMELY weary of which party is doing the regulation and that they're actually tackling the issue and not making it worse.

 @B37BTCNfrom Ontario  answered…2wks2W

Government regulated media would only be a net good if it remained neutral. However, it is too likely that certain parties would abuse it and skew information

 @B35PD2Qfrom Ontario  answered…3wks3W

no but companies need to put notices up that say the information being shared is contrary to scientific/objective consensus.

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Social Media Regulation” news articles, updated frequently.

 @Vot3rVo1ceChloefrom Ohio  submitted…3mos3MO

Trump meeting TikTok CEO as ban deadline looms

US President-elect Donald Trump is meeting the CEO of TikTok as the social media giant fights plans to have it banned in the US.Trump was due to meet Shou Zi Chew at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida on Monday, the BBC's US partner CBS News reports, citing sources familiar with the meeting.A law passed earlier this year means TikTok will be banned unless it is sold by its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, before 19 January.The company has made an emergency application to the US Supreme Court to have the ban delayed.The US wants TikTok sold or banned because of alleged links between ByteDance and the Chinese state, links that both TikTok and ByteDance have always denied.The bill introducing the law said it was intended to "protect the national security of the United States from the threat posed by foreign adversary controlled applications".Trump opposes the ban - despite supporting one during his first term - partly on the grounds that it could help Facebook, which he has accused of aiding his 2020 election loss.Trump's second term, however, won't begin until he is inaugurated on 20 January, the day after the deadline set out in the law.In its filing to the Supreme Court, submitted on Monday, TikTok asked for a "modest delay" to the enforcement of the ban to "create breathing room" for a review by the Court and to allow the incoming administration to "evaluate this matter".It described TikTok as "one of the most significant speech platforms" in the US and said the ban would do "immediate irreparable harm" to the company and its users.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4mos4MO

Peace Over Party: Arab American Leaders Stun Democrats with Mass Trump Endorsement

Former President Trump earned endorsements from "highly respected" Muslim leaders and Imams during a campaign rally in the battleground state of Michigan. Trump, speaking to a crowd in Novi, Michigan, on Saturday afternoon, called the group of Muslim leaders "highly respected," before bringing them onstage."I’m thrilled to accept the endorsement of these highly respected leaders," Trump told the thundering crowd.The group of leaders cited Trump’s commitment to ending wars and ensuring global peace as a primary reason for their support, describing him as a leader who "promises peace, not war.""We, as Muslims, stand with President Trump because he promises peace, not war!" Imam Belal Alzuhairi said. "We are supporting Donald Trump because he promised to end war in the Middle East and Ukraine," Alzuhairi said. "The bloodshed has to stop all over the world, and I think this man can make that happen. I personally believe that God saved his life twice for a reason.""We're going to stop the wars, we're going to make the United States safe again, and we're going to make the world safe," Bazzi said."What a nice endorsement," Trump said after Bazzi’s speech. "These are great people."The Muslim leaders official endorsement came after Amer Ghalib, the mayor of the Detroit-area suburb Hamtramck, announced his support of Trump in a Facebook post on Oct. 20."Though it’s looking good, he may or may not win the election and be the 47th president of the United States, but I believe he is the right choice for this critical time," Ghalib wrote in Arabic on his Facebook page. "I’ll not regret my decision no matter what the outcome would be, and I’m ready to face the consequences. For this, and for many other reasons, I announce my support and endorsement for the former, and hopefully, the next President of the United States, Donald Trump."Ghalib’s endorsement of Trump comes after the two met in Flint earlier this week for a private 20-minute conversation. Ghalib told The Detroit News that Trump "knew a lot about me before the meeting." "We talked about various topics including the debates, the polls updates, the statistics of votes in Michigan and Wayne County, the Arab American concerns and the Yemeni Americans in particular. We also talked about the situation in Yemen," Ghalib said.

▲  622 replies

Active 7hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3mos3MO

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  2019 replies4 agree1 disagree6