Curtain! Social networks Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter have blocked the accounts of US President Donald Trump to block his mad drift against the institutions of his country. The one who will go down in history as a liar and a conspirator has stunned the world with his violent refusal to accept the truth: the American people have democratically chosen a President other than themselves. He was beaten. It is a fact, a truth confirmed by American justice after numerous appeals. And the repeated assertion, retweeted even thousands of times, of an untruth does not make a truth.
Facebook billionaire boss Mark Zuckerberg explained: “Allowing the President to continue to use our services during this period poses too great a risk. “ This decision is a response to “The use of our platform to encourage a violent insurgency against a democratically elected government”.
We can understand the reaction of the digital giants to the extreme gravity of the events that affected the Capitol at a major moment in American democratic life. But this decision also reveals the equally serious threats posed worldwide by the use of social networks for criminal or fraudulent purposes. When they become tools of insults, of harassment when it is not a call to murder, they feed major dangers for peace and our freedom.
The bait of gain
A very simple question arises: are social networks lawless areas? Their leaders have been touting great principles in recent hours because the messages in question are signed by the President of the United States, but refuse to assume the same responsibility for the millions of messages circulating on their digital platforms. However, many of these messages lead daily to unpunished attacks on the most basic rights of citizens who suffer and sometimes die. Messages, most often anonymous. And our society accepts it.
The decision of the wealthy bosses of social networks to block Donald Trump’s accounts in fact reveals an unacceptable reality. While these networks do promote freedom of expression, their leaders refuse to assume their responsibilities for content. However, their extremely sophisticated technological devices would allow them to do so.
Almost 140 years ago, on July 29, 1881, the French Republic adopted the law on freedom of the press. She posited the fact that if the press is free, if it has rights, it also has duties and a major responsibility. If he breaks the law, a journalist is condemned, like his editor. For social networks, lawmakers felt that they were not responsible for the information they disseminate, that there should be no constraints. As if the protection of citizens by law were the enemy of freedom of expression! As if he were responsible for entrusting the guarantee of our freedom of expression to gigantic companies more concerned with the lure of profit than with the quality of the information they disseminate.
The events of the last few days in the United States are a reminder of where it will take us if we leave the situation as it is. The solution will not be only American: the European Union shows its will to act. It will also be judged on its ability to uphold human rights in the digital world.
– .