@ISIDEWITHQuestionsDomestic PolicyStarted 6yrs agoActive 3hrs ago

Should the government regulate social media sites, as a means to prevent fake news and misinformation?

In January 2018 Germany passed the NetzDG law which required platforms like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to take down perceived illegal content within 24 hours or seven days, depending on the charge, or risk a fine of €50 million ($60 million) fines. In July 2018 representatives from Facebook, Google and Twitter denied to the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary committee that they censor content for political reasons. During the hearing Republican members of Congress criticized the social media companies for politically motivated practices in removing some content, a charge the…  

Read more
+
Expand
+ Settings x  Congressional District 1

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 277 Congressional District 1 voters.

28%
Yes
72%
No
20%
Yes
57%
No
5%
Yes, there is too much fake news and misinformation on social media
8%
No, the government should not determine what is fake or real news
3%
Yes, social media companies are politically biased and need to be regulated
7%
No, social media companies are private and should not be regulated by the government

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 277 Congressional District 1 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 277 Congressional District 1 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Congressional District 1 voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @8D7X8VB from Pennsylvania  answered…4yrs4Y

No, but government should require all media outlets (paper, online, radio, tv, etc) to provide both points of view when discussing any political issue. we are at this point; because both points of view are hardly every side-by-side.

 @6VRCV2L from Florida  answered…4yrs4Y

The government should ensure that people who intentionally mislead others are flagged and responded to with factual, non-bias evidence from all sides of the actual story.

 @9NLZLPX from North Carolina  answered…6mos6MO

Yes, but clearly define the terms "fake news" and "misinformation" to ensure that the government doesn’t simply censor what it disagrees with

 @8YZCWH4 from Kentucky  answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, there is too much fake news and misinformation on social media. But social media sites should NOT be regulated by the government, they should be regulated by the owners. Social media sites should STOP being politically biased.

 @6VRZ2N2from Maine  answered…4yrs4Y

Social media companies tend to be profit driven which greatly hinders their ability to run their business without bias. Advert sales are not monitored strictly enough and this results in certain individuals/companies/sovereign states taking advantage of the system in place to push their own political/social agenda with the use of fake statistics and facts to control the mind set of the populous.

 @6VRGFFV from New Mexico  answered…4yrs4Y

The governments role should ensure that antitrust laws are not broken and that there is not a monopoly regarding information. I think that the site providing their information should be required to include enough personal information so one can determine if it is biased.

 @99JGS33 from Kentucky  answered…2yrs2Y

Yes, there is too much fake news and misinformation on social media. But social media sites should NOT be regulated by the government; they should be regulated by the owners. Social media sites should STOP being politically biased.

 @8YFFX26 from Kentucky  answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, there is too much fake news and misinformation on social media. Social media sites should NOT be regulated by the government, they should be regulated by the owners. Social media sites should STOP being politically biased.

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Social Media Regulation” news articles, updated frequently.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4mos4MO

Senate Passes Child Online Safety Bill

The centerpiece of the legislation would create a “duty of care” for social networking platforms that mandates they protect minors against mental health disorders and from abuse, sexual exploitation and other harms. Companies could be held liable for failing to filter out content or limit features that could lead to those adverse impacts.Led by Mr. Blumenthal and Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, the legislation also would require technology service providers to turn on the highest privacy and safety settings by default for users under 17 and to allow youths to opt out of some features that can lead to compulsive use, such as auto-playing of videos.A second measure included in the package would strengthen privacy protections for anyone under 17 and ban targeted advertising to children and teens. It would create an “eraser button” for parents and children, requiring companies to permit users to delete personal information.Mr. Blumenthal acknowledged that he and Ms. Blackburn had “diametrically opposed” voting records on most issues — he is the third-most liberal senator, and she the second-most conservative, according to the nonpartisan service GovTrack. But they united around the goal of making the internet safer for children. And they were particularly motivated by the parents who told gut-wrenching stories of losing their children, some to suicide, and young people who described the mental distress that social media imposes on them.

5 replies

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

Active 9hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2wks2W

Kamala Harris is considering running for president again in 2028

Kamala Harris has been lying low since her defeat in the presidential race, unwinding with family and senior aides in Hawaii before heading back to the nation’s capital.But privately, the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”She is expected to explore those and other possible paths forward with family members over the winter holiday season, according to five people in the Harris inner circle, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. Her deliberations follow an extraordinary four months in which Harris went from President Joe Biden’s running mate to the top of the ticket, reenergizing Democrats before ultimately crashing on election night.“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”Harris concedes: 'We must accept the results of this election'SharePlay VideoMost immediately, Harris and her advisers are working to define how and when she will speak out against Donald Trump and reassert her own role in the Democratic Party. Closing out her term as vice president, she’s set to preside over certifying the November election she lost to Trump, and then appear at the once-and-future president’s inauguration on Jan. 20.“There will be a desire to hear her voice, and there won’t be a vacuum for long,” a person close to Harris said.At the same time, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, will have a long checklist to plow through before they leave the Naval Observatory for good.They have to decide whether they’ll take up permanent residence at their home in Los Angeles, or establish a base elsewhere. No matter where Harris and her family live, some around her have expressed concerns about safety, as her Secret Service protection expires six months after stepping away.

▲  1022 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2 days2D

CEO Shooting Suspect Had Manifesto That Criticized Healthcare Companies

A man is being held for questioning in connection with last week’s killing of a health insurance executive in Midtown Manhattan, the police said.The man being questioned was identified as Luigi Mangione, 26, the police commissioner, Jessica Tisch, said at a news briefing. He was identified in a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pa., after an employee recognized him and called the authorities at about 9:15 a.m. on Monday.Mr. Mangione was carrying identification with his name on it, along with fake I.D., according to law enforcement officials.Mr. Mangione showed the police the same fake New Jersey identification that the man believed to be the gunman presented when he checked into a hostel on the Upper West Side of Manhattan on Nov. 24, a senior law enforcement official saidWhen Mr. Mangione was approached in Altoona, he had a gun, a silencer and other false identification cards similar to those they believe the killer used in New York, according to one of the law enforcement officials and a person briefed on the investigation. The gun was described as possibly being a so-called ghost gun, assembled from parts purchased online.Mr. Mangione was also carrying a handwritten manifesto that criticized health care companies for putting profits above care, according to two law enforcement officials.Mr. Mangione is in custody on local charges, the official said, possibly related to presenting the fake identification to the police. He has not been arrested or charged in connection with the killing.New York police investigators are traveling to Altoona, in western Pennsylvania, about 280 miles from the city, according to one of the law enforcement officials.

▲  2011 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…24hrs24H

Israel Sinks Syria's Navy

Israel said Tuesday that it had destroyed Syria’s navy in overnight airstrikes, as it continued to pound targets in Syria despite warnings that its operations there could ignite new conflict and jeopardize the transition of power to an interim government.Israel’s defense minister, Israel Katz, said that the Israeli military had “destroyed Syria’s navy overnight, and with great success.” His remarks appeared to confirm Israel’s responsibility for the destruction documented in the Syrian port city of Latakia, where photos showed the smoldering remains of ships sunk at their dock.Mr. Katz said that Israel’s military “has been operating in Syria in recent days to hit and destroy strategic capabilities that pose a threat to Israel,” although he did not indicate what new or immediate risk Syria’s navy presented to Israel, which has the most powerful military in the Middle East.Israeli warplanes have conducted hundreds of strikes in Syria since the fall of President Bashar al-Assad on Sunday, according to war monitors. Israel has characterized its operations as defensive, saying its military was striking suspected chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria to prevent them from falling “into the hands of extremists.”“From here, I warn the rebel leaders in Syria: Those who follow Assad’s path will end like Assad,” Mr. Katz said.As the Assad government fell to the rebels over the weekend, Israeli ground forces advanced beyond the demilitarized zone on the Israel-Syria border, marking their first overt entry into Syrian territory in more than 50 years. An Israeli military spokesman on Tuesday denied reports that the military was advancing on Damascus. The spokesman, Avichay Adraee, said the military was inside a buffer zone between Israel and Syria and at other points “in order to protect the Israeli border.”Earlier Tuesday, Geir Pedersen, the United Nations special envoy for Syria, called on Israel to halt its “very troubling” military operations there, and said de-escalation was needed. “We are continuing to see Israeli movements and bombardments into Syrian territory. This needs to stop,” Mr. Pedersen told reporters in Geneva.

▲  1511 replies

Active 1hr ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1hr1H

FBI Director Chris Wray Will Resign

The F.B.I. director, Christopher A. Wray, told bureau employees on Wednesday that he intended to resign before the Trump administration begins, bowing to the reality that President-elect Donald J. Trump had publicly declared his desire to replace him.Mr. Wray made the disclosure while addressing employees Wednesday afternoon in remarks that tacitly acknowledged the politically charged position the F.B.I. now faces with an incoming president who openly scorns the agency.“I’ve decided the right thing for the bureau is for me to serve until the end of the current administration in January and then step down,” Mr. Wray said, adding, “This is the best way to avoid dragging the bureau deeper into the fray, while reinforcing the values and principles that are so important to how we do our work.”The director spoke wistfully about his time at the F.B.I. “This is not easy for me,” he said. “I love this place, I love our mission and I love our people.”The announcement comes after Mr. Trump said in late November that he intended to nominate Kash Patel, a longtime loyalist, to run the F.B.I., and more than two years before Mr. Wray’s 10-year term would have expired.Paul Abbate, the deputy F.B.I. director, is set to retire in April but would typically serve as acting director until Mr. Patel is confirmed. It is not clear who would replace Mr. Abbate, the most senior agent in the bureau.Over more than seven years, Mr. Wray oversaw one of the most consequential and tumultuous periods in the bureau’s history, juggling high-profile criminal investigations of political figures, heated congressional inquiries and two attempted assassinations of Mr. Trump.

▲  135 replies

Active 59mins ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1hr1H

US Jewish Groups Oppose Resettling Gaza

JTA — A number of major centrist and liberal American Jewish groups say they oppose the re-establishment of Israeli settlements in Gaza.The statements by some of the largest Jewish organizations in the country, made in response to press inquiries, come amid accusations that Israel has cleared out portions of northern Gaza, which Jerusalem has denied, and as far-right government ministers have called for resettling the Palestinian enclave. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir have also repeatedly called for Israel to encourage Palestinians to leave Gaza, drawing condemnation from the Biden administration.For several American Jewish groups — including some that have vocally defended Israel’s prosecution of its war in Gaza against Hamas — the idea of Israeli settlements in Gaza is a non-starter. Groups opposed to the idea include the Jewish Federations of North America, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League. Also opposed are bodies representing the Reform and Conservative movements, which together can claim to represent the majority of American Jews.“The land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, indigenous to both Jews and Arabs, cannot be the exclusive domain of one people, but must be shared,” Jason Isaacson, AJC’s chief policy and political affairs officer, said. “Like the vast majority of Israelis, AJC believes that the re-establishment of Israeli settlements in Gaza, or a program of displacing Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank, would be contrary to Israel’s interests.”Israel evacuated its Gaza settlements in 2005, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly ruled out the idea of re-establishing them after the war. But while most Israelis oppose the idea, more than a third — including 42% of Israeli Jews — support it, according to a recent poll by the Israel Democracy Institute. That includes nearly 60% of Israeli Jewish right-wingers, the current government’s voter base.“Ideas like settlement in Gaza are welcome, we need to remember that, in the end, that’s the biggest punishment for what they did to us on October 7,” Ben-Gvir said in an interview on Israeli radio this month, referencing the Hamas terror onslaught in southern Israel, in which some 1,200 people were slaughtered and 251 were seized as hostages, sparking the war in the enclave.

▲  98 replies

Active 1hr ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2hrs2H

Border Bombshell: 8 Million New Arrivals Under Biden

The immigration surge of the past few years has been the largest in U.S. history, surpassing the great immigration boom of the late 1800s and early 1900s, according to a New York Times analysis of government data.Annual net migration — the number of people coming to the country minus the number leaving — averaged 2.4 million people from 2021 to 2023, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Total net migration during the Biden administration is likely to exceed eight million people.That’s a faster pace of arrivals than during any other period on record, including the peak years of Ellis Island traffic, when millions of Europeans came to the United States. Even after taking into account today’s larger U.S. population, the recent surge is the most rapid since at least 1850.The numbers in the Times analysis include both legal and illegal immigration. About 60 percent of immigrants who have entered the country since 2021 have done so without legal authorization, according to a Goldman Sachs report based on government data.The combined increases of legal and illegal immigration have caused the share of the U.S. population born in another country to reach a new high, 15.2 percent in 2023, up from 13.6 percent in 2020. The previous high was 14.8 percent, in 1890.Several factors caused the surge, starting with President Biden’s welcoming immigration policy during his first three years in office. Offended by Donald J. Trump’s harsh policies — including the separation of families at the border — Mr. Biden and other Democrats promised a different approach. “We’re a nation that says, ‘If you want to flee, and you’re fleeing oppression, you should come,’” Mr. Biden said during his 2020 presidential campaign.After taking office, his administration loosened the rules on asylum and other immigration policies, making it easier for people to enter the United States. Some have received temporary legal status while their cases wend through backlogged immigration courts. Others have remained without legal permission.

▲  1512 replies