Social Media as Common Carrier and Policing

I've argued for a while that The phone company does not promote content or connections, while algorithmically-driven social media platforms have been doing just that in the name of “driving engagement”.

Pointing this out on Diaspora, Simons Mith responds:

Therefore: if social media companies either choose to or are forced to become common carriers, the ‘driving engagement’ activities that they currently perform will transfer to other parties. But those activities will remain just as pervasive and odious as it they are now, because that’s what works, and the social media companies, once they’re common carriers, won’t be obliged to police it. And I also reckon the police will continue to remain exactly as interested in policing it as they are now.

That's highly cogent.

I'm not entirely sure how to respond, though I do note that earlier networked common carriers are not entirely limited from restricting types of conduct or types of exchanges. Additionally, postal services, railroads, and transit agencies have their own inspectors or police forces. In the case of broadcast networks, there is the network censor and government oversite (FCC in the US). Even hotels have detectives.

@pluralistic might be interested.

https://joindiaspora.com/posts/36cdd860cef60139a303002590d8e506#ed282c70cfde0139eab1005056264835

#CommonCarrier #Internet #PostalService #Telegraph #Telephone #Communications #Railroads #TransitCops #PostalInspectors #RailroadPolice #NetworkCensor #Regulation #Moderation