It seems that Mikey Arroyo, a congressman and the son of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, wants Facebook regulated, after a story and photo about him allegedly buying liquor just a day after Ondoy slammed Metro Manila were posted on the popular social networking site.
I'm not familiar with FB's policies, but I'm sure that, like other sites, FB requires its members to read and agree with certain terms of usage. Whether these terms extend to regulate libelous, defamatory, or malicious content, I really don't know. One might argue that FB users are there not to malign public figures or even to overthrow the government, but to engage in meaningful discourse with friends and family. What the acceptable definitions of "meaningful" might be, would again be subject to some sort of consensus among its users. If users found meaning in posting photos and videos of Metro Manila floods caused by Ondoy's rains, then surely their contacts (fellow users) also found meaning in viewing them.
The more important point, I think, is that any regulation of FB or other social networking sites begs several questions, the first of which might be: "Who is to regulate it?" There are millions of Facebook users all over the world uploading thousands of posts in a day. Does anyone have the resources/manpower to censor each post, each user, each day?
I used the word "censor" just now, because in effect, that's what is being proposed here. To regulate a social networking site means to control who can post what, and when. Again, I'm unfamiliar with FB's policies, but I'm assuming that the onus is on FB users themselves. After all, they are no longer just consumers or passive receivers of information, but are thrust into the role of producers of information.
And with this comes the responsibility of being their own gatekeepers as well.
Click
here to read the story on CMFR's site.
