The latest polling:
Using surveys of 840,537 individuals from 2,232 subnational regions in 116 countries in 2008-2017 from the Gallup World Poll and the global expansion of 3G networks, we show that an increase in internet access reduces government approval and increases the perception of corruption in government. This effect is present only when the internet is not censored and is stronger when traditional media is censored.
Suppose it turns out to be true that the inevitable effect of uncensored social media is increased political polarization and decreased respect for government and most other institutions. Is that an argument for censorship?
Suppose it turns out to be true that the inevitable effect of uncensored social media is increased political polarization and decreased respect for government and most other institutions. Is that an argument for censorship?
ReplyDeleteThat's far too big a logical leap. An inevitable effect? That's absurd.
If an uncensored internet increases the perception of government corruption, the simplest logical explanation is that the government is corrupt and an uncensored internet better reveals that fact.
When people can better see how the sausage gets made, they start to protest more loudly about what they are given to eat.
And quite naturally there will be bitter partisanship and division developing between those who are unhappy with the sawdust and rat droppings in their sausages, and those who prefer the usage of such ingredients (either due to their own personal tastes, or because their personal fortunes depend on such usage).
Our current political divide is almost wholly between those who are unhappy with the corruption in our government and society, and those who either profit from that corruption or who are willing to overlook it to preserve the status quo.
Liberals champion Justice.
Conservatives champion Order.
One is interested in righting wrongs.
The other is interested in perpetuating wrongs.