The Unplatformed Discourse
An academic exploration of the practice of removing individuals or groups from public platforms, examining its historical roots, modern manifestations, and societal implications.
What is Deplatforming? ๐ Explore History ๐Dive in with Flashcard Learning!
๐ฎ Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game๐ฎ
What is Deplatforming?
Definition and Scope
Deplatforming, also referred to as "no-platforming," constitutes a form of boycott wherein access to platforms used for disseminating information or ideas is denied to an individual or group. This practice is particularly prevalent and discussed within the context of contemporary social media environments.
Public Discourse and Expression
The core of deplatforming involves the removal of an individual's or group's ability to express their views through established channels. This action directly impacts public discourse by limiting the visibility and reach of certain ideas or speakers, often based on perceived harm or controversy associated with their content.
Legal and Ethical Considerations
While deplatforming by private entities is generally distinct from government censorship under constitutional protections like the First Amendment in the United States, it raises significant ethical questions regarding free speech, platform responsibility, and the potential for bias in content moderation. The debate often centers on balancing the protection of vulnerable groups from harmful speech against the principle of open expression.
Historical Context
University Campus Precedents
The practice of deplatforming speakers on university campuses has historical roots dating back to the mid-20th century. Universities, through their own policies, began restricting access for speakers deemed unqualified or intending to use the institution as a platform for propaganda. For instance, the University of California's "Speaker Ban" policy, enacted under President Robert Gordon Sproul, targeted individuals based on their political affiliations or perceived ideological agendas.
The British "No Platform" Policy
In the United Kingdom, the National Union of Students (NUS) formally adopted a "No Platform" policy as early as 1973. This policy aimed to prevent individuals or groups associated with fascism and racism from speaking on university campuses, reflecting a specific political and social context of the time.
Modern Campus Disruptions
In the United States, contemporary instances involve protests and attempts to disinvite speakers from college campuses. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has documented numerous such incidents, categorizing them by successful disinvitations, speaker withdrawals due to pressure, or "heckler's vetoes" where disruptions entirely prevent a speech.
Deplatforming of Invited Speakers
Campus Speech Controversies
The phenomenon of deplatforming extends to contemporary academic settings, where invited speakers often face protests and demands for disinvitation. These actions are frequently driven by student groups or faculty concerned about the speaker's views, which may be perceived as offensive, discriminatory, or harmful.
Statistical Overview
According to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), hundreds of disinvitation or disruption attempts have been documented on American campuses since 2000. These incidents highlight a recurring tension between institutional commitments to free speech and the pressures exerted by activist groups seeking to control the boundaries of acceptable discourse.
Documenting the Trend
The challenges faced by speakers invited to campuses have been documented in various media, including films like "No Safe Spaces," which explores the experiences of figures like Adam Carolla and Dennis Prager with disinvitation efforts. These narratives underscore the perceived impact of deplatforming on open debate and academic freedom.
Legislative and Policy Responses
United Kingdom's Approach
The UK government has introduced legislative measures aimed at addressing deplatforming. The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill proposes allowing speakers to seek compensation for deplatforming incidents on university campuses and empowers regulators to impose fines on institutions and student unions that facilitate such practices. Additionally, the Online Safety Bill seeks to prevent social media networks from discriminating against political viewpoints or removing "democratically important" content.
United States' Regulatory Debates
In the United States, discussions around deplatforming often involve proposals to regulate social media platforms. Some advocate for treating social media as public utilities to safeguard users' constitutional rights, arguing that online presence is essential for 21st-century participation. Efforts have also been made by Republican politicians to amend or repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, citing concerns that platform moderation policies are not politically neutral.
Perspectives on Deplatforming
Arguments in Support
Proponents of deplatforming often frame it as a necessary tool to combat the proliferation of hate speech, disinformation, and harmful ideologies. They argue that platforms have an editorial responsibility, akin to news organizations, to moderate content and prevent the amplification of damaging narratives. This perspective emphasizes the potential for deplatforming to reduce the reach and impact of malicious actors.
Critical Responses
Critics express concern that deplatforming practices by technology companies constitute a form of censorship that stifles dissenting opinions and creates a "chilling effect" on free expression. They argue that platforms may selectively remove ideologically disfavored accounts under the guise of policy enforcement. This perspective also raises concerns about the potential for such actions to impact paying customers and the broader implications for academic and public discourse.
Further Exploration
Academic Research
For a deeper understanding of the dynamics and implications of deplatforming, particularly concerning online platforms and extreme content creators, academic research provides valuable insights into user migration patterns and the effectiveness of such interventions.
Teacher's Corner
Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio
Click here to open the "Deplatforming" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit
Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.
True or False?
Test Your Knowledge!
Gamer's Corner
Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?
Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!
Play now
References
References
- John Healy (January 8, 2021) Opinion: It took a mob riot for Twitter to finally ban Trump
- Danny Crichton (January 9, 2021) The deplatforming of President Trump
Feedback & Support
To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.
Disclaimer
Important Notice
This page was generated by an Artificial Intelligence and is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content is based on a snapshot of publicly available data from Wikipedia and may not be entirely accurate, complete, or up-to-date.
This is not professional advice. The information provided on this website is not a substitute for professional consultation on matters of free speech, platform policy, or legal interpretation. Always consult with qualified experts for specific guidance.
The creators of this page are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any actions taken based on the information provided herein.
Deplatforming in the Digital Sphere ๐ป
๐ Platform Moderation Policies
Social media platforms have increasingly engaged in content moderation, leading to the deplatforming of users and communities. Actions range from banning specific subreddits on Reddit for violating anti-harassment policies to removing accounts of prominent figures for policy violations, such as hate speech or incitement.
๐ฐ Demonetization as a Tool
Demonetization, the practice of withholding financial compensation for content that remains available on a platform, is another method used to manage content. Platforms like YouTube may demonetize videos deemed unsuitable for advertisers, impacting content creators' revenue while allowing the content to persist, thereby creating a distinct form of indirect deplatforming.
๐ Impact and Migration
Research suggests that deplatforming can reduce an individual's audience and influence. However, some studies also indicate that deplatformed content creators may migrate to alternative platforms ("alt-tech"), potentially fostering more toxic environments or reinforcing existing echo chambers. The effectiveness and consequences of deplatforming remain subjects of ongoing analysis.