Making the wrong post on Facebook can be dangerous!

What responsibility does social media particularly Facebook have in many of the deaths and mutilations that result from posting on Facebook?  I am not talking about the typical ones that I have read about where a man kills his wife because she changed her status on Facebook from married to single or man kills his best friend because he sent his girlfriend a wave on Facebook, a woman kills young teens after she seduces them on Facebook or a teenager that shoots his dad for grounding him from using social media.  I do not think operators of social media sites can prevent these mentally deranged people from committing horrendous crimes.

The recent events in Indonesia and Thailand have caused me to think that Facebook and other social media sites should take some action in preventing post in countries where they know certain posts may or will bring harm to their customers. Particularly when the person posting is a minor. 

A sharia court in Indonesia sentenced two Indonesian men to be publicly caned for gay sex for the first time in the conservative province of Aceh, the latest sign of a backlash against homosexuals in the Muslim-majority country.

The pair, aged 20 and 23, were sentenced to 85 strokes of the cane each after being found guilty of breaking sharia law in the only part of Indonesia that implements the strict Islamic regulations.  After this event I looked at Facebook posting from Indonesia and found many in their profile stated they were gay.  Many of the pictures they posted on Facebook would lead someone to think they were living a gay lifestyle.  Looking at their friends list can indicate they have an interest in a gay lifestyle. 

Now I know Indonesia, which has the largest Muslim population in the world, in the past has always followed a moderate form of Islam. But attitudes are changing within the government concerning sharia law and certainly among the growing number of radical Islamic Indonesians.  Social reforms regarding homosexuality and gender equality has swung far to the right. 

Facebook had no way of knowing these changes would come about, but the problem is they will continue to allow people to post items on Facebook that they know could bring them great harm or death or prison terms.  Many of these people making these posting are teenagers that do not really understand the possible consequences of their actions.  Just as Facebook knew of the problems in Thailand of posting criticism of the King or government they continue to allow teenagers to do so in the name of personal freedom.  The Thai government even warned Facebook of the consequences these posting could have and Facebook refused to monitor the site in Thailand.  Is it morally or ethically acceptable for a company that knows personal freedom in certain countries may or will bring prison and death to minors for them to continue to allow minors to take this risk?   

People in Thailand are going to jail for long periods of time for Facebook comments.  One example is "Do dogs have blue blood now?"  A comment made in December, by a 21 year old college student, reacting to a news story that a man had been charged with making fun of the king's dog and was facing up to 15 years of imprisonment, under the country's lèse majesté law, which punishes anyone who criticizes the king or his family. The man posting the comment could have been sentenced to ten years in prison, but the King showed mercy and he served 385 days. 

In 2016 two people were sentenced to 25 to 30 years for posting on Facebook they thought the government was corrupt.   I believe people have a personal responsibility for what they post, but I also believe many, especially the young, do not understand the possible consequences of their posting.  They are just innocent remarks made on Facebook. 

Most countries will hold corporations and retailers responsible for selling alcohol to minors.  There are countries that hold corporations and retailers responsible for protecting minors from being able to purchase firearms, glue, cigarettes and other inhalants.  Why then does social media, particularly Facebook, have no responsibility to protect minors?

In my opinion Facebook should have a moral and legal responsibility to go back and remove any damaging remarks from Indonesian and Thailand posting and profiles that could bring their clients harm.  The political climate, in Indonesia particularly, has changed and Facebook nor its clients knew this change would come about, but Facebook should now be concerned about their clients and do the right thing and remove dangerous postings.

Does Facebook make their clients really aware that anyone can get access to information saved to a Facebook profile, even if the information was not intended to be made public?  I think not.  Randi Zuckerberg the sister of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, criticized a friend for being "way uncool" in sharing a private Facebook photo of her on Twitter, only to be told that the image had appeared on a friend-of-a-friend's Facebook news feed.  Even Randi Zuckerberg can get it wrong. That's an example  of how confusing or how you cannot protect yourself from leaks.

Facebook claims they do not want to infringe upon their client's freedom of speech, but Facebook has no problem in censoring news stories that do not reflect their corporate views.  Compare the pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli stories on Facebook news.  They do not mind infringing upon their clients freedom to get all the facts.  Compare their reporting of the Clinton’s (Democrats) and President Trump (Republicans). 

The popular Facebook Live app — normally used by millions to broadcast weddings, concerts and other personal events — has increasingly become a forum for violent acts such as killings, rapes, torture and suicides.  Does Facebook have an obligation to address this problem?  I think so.  It could devise an algorithm to monitor the live transmissions and uploaded videos of its nearly 2 billion members — possibly through key word or images searches — or its thousands of curators might be more vigilant in spotting and ending the transmission of suspicious activity in real-time.  I realize it is not an easy task to accomplish, but it could be accomplished. 

Why is Facebook not put to the same levels of decency as those that exist on television broadcasters?

It is hard for me to believe that Facebook cannot put in place some type of monitoring program to censor postings of clients in certain countries in order to protect them from their government.  Is it they cannot or they do not want to spend the funds or take the time to do so?

Facebook and other social media can bring instant gratification and sometimes instant gratification leads to regrets.  Some got instant gratification from criticizing President Duterte in the Philippines. Now martial law has been declared in some area.  Will there be people who will now find they regret those remarks that only brought them instant gratification and did not bring any real change to the country’s political and economical status?