Some argue that social media platforms should not micromanage freedom of speech. Regulation can violate a fundamental democratic principle, give unelected CEOs unwarranted power and limit free-flowing debate. 

Violating democracy: Freedom of speech allows all citizens to express their opinions equally and keeps governments accountable. In democratic constitutions worldwide, this freedom is protected for all individuals and permits other human rights, including freedom of religion and association, to be practised. Therefore, social media platforms curbing freedom of speech can set a dangerous precedent in private companies, overriding an essential democratic principle. 

CEO power: Instead of democratic law, social media CEOs can decide how to limit freedom of speech. These unelected and less accountable people focus more on increasing profits, sometimes causing chaos for more views, rather than on societal well-being. X (formerly Twitter) owner Elon Musk often finds himself at the epicentre of controversy, offering to impregnate Taylor Swift or mocking the LGBTQ+ community. Entrusting polarising figures with the power to constrain free speech can result in media platforms presenting imbalanced views.

Freedom of speech allows all citizens to express their opinions equally and keeps governments accountable

Debate Space: Social media has become a space for debate and expression, a ‘modern-day public square’, therefore regulating freedom of speech will stifle healthy conversation. One in five social media users engages in political discussion online, and these platforms have become vital in influencing elections and shaping attitudes. Allowing social media platforms to regulate debate and speech may lead to a reduction in opinions expressed online, and could lead to self-censorship.

Social media is the only public forum with global societal outreach. With such influence, some regulation is necessary to provide factual information, tune out harmful ideologies, and offer online safety and well-being.

Accurate Facts: Ensuring the accuracy and trustworthiness of the information shared is crucial to telling objective realities from beliefs. Without regulation, social media can become a breeding ground for misinformation, inspiring conspiracy theories such as those reiterated by Trump, suggesting that the immigrant community of Springfield were eating their pets. Algorithms of social media sites promote baseless claims, making regulation necessary to prevent fake information from gaining traction.  

Harmful Ideologies: Social media algorithms can create echo chambers of discriminatory and harmful ideologies, amplifying dangerous voices. Platforms can facilitate such individuals, as seen in the Jan 6th insurrection in the US and the far-right riots in the UK. Social media was critical to allowing extremists' opinions to materialise and spread. Freedom of speech should exist with constraints to prevent discriminatory ideals from being promoted.

Social media companies are responsible for creating a safe environment on their platforms

Safety and Well-being: Social media companies are responsible for creating a safe environment on their platforms. They exercise editorial discretion, moderating content to abide by company welfare and community guidelines. Recent US Supreme Court rulings affirm social media content moderation does not violate the First Amendment right of freedom of speech. Flagging hate speech and removing explicit content from sites aimed at children work as a protective mechanism to promote online safety and societal well-being.