Are You Sure You Want to View This Community? Exploring the Ethics of Reddit’s Quarantine Practice

IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 COMMUNICATION Journal of Media Ethics Pub Date : 2020-09-11 DOI:10.1080/23736992.2020.1819285
C. Carlson, Luc S. Cousineau
{"title":"Are You Sure You Want to View This Community? Exploring the Ethics of Reddit’s Quarantine Practice","authors":"C. Carlson, Luc S. Cousineau","doi":"10.1080/23736992.2020.1819285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the United States, social media organizations are not legally liable for what users do or say on their platforms and are free to regulate expression in any way they see fit. As a result, dark corners of the Internet have emerged to foster communities whose sole purpose is to create and share content that subjugates members of traditionally marginalized groups. The subreddit,/r/TheRedPill, is one such community. This article explores whether hiding this offensive content through digital “quarantine” or removing the community altogether is more ethically justifiable. We draw on theorizing about the ethics of social media content moderation to develop a framework for ethical decision-making based on transparency, corporate social responsibility, and human dignity to guide decisions about content removal. Using/r/TheRedPill as a case study, we argue that the most ethically justified course of action is for Reddit to remove the site entirely from its platform.","PeriodicalId":45979,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"202 - 213"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23736992.2020.1819285","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

ABSTRACT In the United States, social media organizations are not legally liable for what users do or say on their platforms and are free to regulate expression in any way they see fit. As a result, dark corners of the Internet have emerged to foster communities whose sole purpose is to create and share content that subjugates members of traditionally marginalized groups. The subreddit,/r/TheRedPill, is one such community. This article explores whether hiding this offensive content through digital “quarantine” or removing the community altogether is more ethically justifiable. We draw on theorizing about the ethics of social media content moderation to develop a framework for ethical decision-making based on transparency, corporate social responsibility, and human dignity to guide decisions about content removal. Using/r/TheRedPill as a case study, we argue that the most ethically justified course of action is for Reddit to remove the site entirely from its platform.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
您确定要查看此社区吗?探索Reddit隔离实践的伦理
在美国,社交媒体组织对用户在其平台上的行为或言论不承担法律责任,可以自由地以任何他们认为合适的方式规范表达。因此,互联网的黑暗角落已经出现,以培育社区,其唯一目的是创造和分享征服传统边缘化群体成员的内容。reddit的子版块/r/TheRedPill就是这样一个社区。本文探讨了通过数字“隔离”隐藏这些令人反感的内容还是完全删除社区在道德上更合理。我们借鉴关于社交媒体内容审核的道德理论,以透明度、企业社会责任和人类尊严为基础,制定一个道德决策框架,指导内容删除的决策。以/r/TheRedPill为例,我们认为最合乎道德的做法是Reddit将该网站从其平台上完全移除。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
15.80%
发文量
27
期刊最新文献
In Defense of Journalism and Presidential Debates From Classroom to Global Discourse: New Resources for Media Ethics Character Skepticism and the Virtuous Journalist Inside the Ivory Tower: How Student Journalists Reason About Ethics The Influence of Crucibles of Experience in Moral Development & Psychology of Public Relations Exemplars
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1