To Silence Or Not to Silence: Will silencing users on Facebook stop the spread of misinformation?

Illustration from World Health Organization 

Technology, especially social media, has evolved so much over the years, allowing users to access the most information possible. However, many people cannot differentiate the difference between fact and fiction, which ultimately spreads misinformation. 

The most significant contributor to the spread of misinformation is Facebook. Their most significant offense is allowing so much misinformation to spread online leading up to the 2020 election. Unfortunately, the company did not tweak its algorithms that sought this false content until October, when the election was in November. 

Another mishap occurred during this period; Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was also accused of allowing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines on the site. His argument for this claim was that "getting rid of misinformation on Facebook is just too hard, and people should expect less." Unfortunately, with this mentality, the spread of falsity will grow on and on. 

After the 2016 election, when Facebook was accused of impacting the election because of fake news on the platform, Zuckerberg said that "voters make decisions based on their lived experience." Not only did he not acknowledge that his platform could be at fault, but he also did not see that misinformation is even a problem. He could not admit that information spread on his site might have negatively impacted such an important event. 

After Facebook declared it would crackdown, or somewhat, on misinformation, many conservatives claimed that the platform targeted conservative voices and even questioned the legality of monitoring content online. Facebook responded, saying they hope to squash extremism and misinformation, not target right-wing voices. 

During the long-winded free speech debate between Facebook, users, and politicians, a recurring argument against monitoring content was that free speech was allowed online; the right of free speech was codified in the First Amendment. When that right was recognized many years ago, the Founding Fathers were probably not expecting social media's ability to impact society so much. 

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act allows companies like Facebook to moderate content on their sites, but they are not liable for illegal content. So while Zuckerberg does have the ability to monitor misinformation being spread, he chooses not to. 

Facebook needs to continue monitoring content to stop the spread of misinformation. It is more important to silence blatantly false voices rather than being worried about the few users who believe and whether they believe that is targeting. The situation will worsen if this continues, and it will only contribute to public distrust.