Facebook’s decision to lie Kashmir-related posts fume of hypocrisy :- A largest social media networking website globally, Facebook has constantly touted itself to be a generous stage and with an intention to be the organ of more than a billion active users and the platform, following its beginning in 2004. Further, facebook has come a long way from a small website connecting people essentially to being one of the most important all including platforms already.
According to the reports, Where maximum newspapers and mobile phone networks were barred in the Kashmir valley and people took the help of social media to get the message across.
The virtual stage has inhabited in trouble; its wellbeing catch for catastrophes, support for the opportunity of expression.
Longing to individuals explains their conclusions are few explanations behind the organization’s epic acclaim. This popularity has dragged them out of ‘untidy circumstances’ on various numbers.
In unspecified fact, as an Indian native, I can’t pardon Facebook this time not after its fraudulent treatment of the on-going Kashmir disaster.
Where it has been blamed for obstructing the records and posts of numerous Indians means particularly Kashmiris, who set up statuses to educate whatever is left of the nation about the grave agitation there.
Extremism and unrestricted speech not the same :
While a portion of the Kashmir-related posts doing rounds on the online networking stage were not ‘satisfying to the eye’, most others were simply direct perspectives on the issue.
While kept in touch with check the contention. So what did Facebook do? It blue-penciled numerous posts by individuals who talked sympathetically about the scene.
And, Asserting that the posts were against their group guidelines. Kavita Krishnan, Secretary of the All India Progressive Women’s Association (AIPWA), has additionally profoundly scrutinized the stage for blocking remarks on the issue. While this is only one event, there have been a few occurrences in the past where Facebook chose to piece clients or bring down posts that raised social matters.
Double Standards :
While, Facebook Chief Mark Zuckerberg has dependably appeared to be a liberal, broadening support toward heap dubious issues.
In several cases, it appears that his stage doesn’t recognize what ‘flexibility of expression’ means.
It has likewise been seen previously that specific perspectives have dependably been discredited by the stage, and that as well, on with no rationale. With reportage on the Kashmir distress crossing national limits, the graveness of the issue is not covered any longer.
It’s a disgrace that Facebook chose to square clients and remarks even in the wake of knowing the circumstance in the valley.
Considering the principal significance that online networking stages hold in our life, this restriction issue raises a catastrophic concern, one that checks right to free discourse.
An extensive opportunity has already past the stage figures out how to separate between defamatory comments and flexibility to express on critical issues.