"With great power, comes great responsibility."
These are the words spoken by Uncle Ben to Peter Parker in the 2002 version of Spider Man. It's a highly quotable moment from the film, and it is completely relevant today in political and social discourse.
With the development of social media over the past few decades, it is easier than ever for ordinary people to reach a wide audience. One doesn't need to be a movie star or a famous singer to gain a sizable following. Instagram, Youtube, and Twitch are now all viable pathways to fame, and these influencers can become celebrities in their own right.
With an increasing accessibility to audiences, reflecting on freedom of speech and hate speech become important. What responsibilities does an influencer have? How much power do they have over their audiences? Should there be restrictions on what they say?
There is a school of thought that suggests people should be able to say anything they want with no consequences. Words are just words after all, right? "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me" and all.
Well, I have to disagree here. I find there to be some glaring problems with this school of thought.
The first problem I have is its reliance on the assumption that people can control whether they are hurt by words. I don't find this to be particularly accurate.
Yes, one can choose how to respond to those words. They can choose to respond to the emotions they're having. But saying they can choose to not be hurt by words is kind of like saying you can choose to not feel pain after being cut.
It's just not something we can do as human beings. Again, we can choose how to respond to the pain, but the pain itself is going to happen whether we like it or not.
Words are similar. When one hears a word, there is going to be an effect in their mind, an emotion. It may not last for long. For some, it might be just a split second. But it's still there.
And the person who spoke the words is directly responsible for causing it. If they had not spoken the words, or even changed the words they used, the effect would be different.
Ignoring the reality of how words can negatively affect other people is not just ignorant, it's dangerous. There are countless cases of bullying victims who have eventually committed suicide because of the mental pain caused by the words was so great. In many of these cases, the bullies were charged with criminal offences.
This leads into the second reason why I disagree with the "allow all speech" school of thought. It's built upon a framework that engages in blaming the victim.
Even if the first premise was true, that we all can control whether we are hurt by words, it assumes that it is 100% the victim's responsibility to not get hurt, and not putting an onus on the one doing the hurting.
This idea is much like suggesting it's the children's responsibility to not get shot in a school shooting. It sounds pretty ridiculous when I put it like that, doesn't it? But it's the same principle.
Whenever I see a case where a teenager commits suicide due to bullying, I always see comments listing all the things the teen should have done. "He should have talked to someone," for example.
The thing is, I don't disagree with some of these statements themselves. They're good advice, and from the victim's side of things, you can't control others. You can only control yourself.
But then you have to ask, why should someone have to manage negativity from someone else in the first place? They didn't ask for it. Why is it their responsibility?
Someone's inability to manage another person's negativity should be looked upon with empathy, not condemnation.
The last reason for my opposition of the "say anything you want" idea is that it devalues empathy. A lot of the time, when people argue for absolute free speech, I find it's because they just want to say horrible things without consequence.
Let's talk about intention for a moment.
It is my opinion that intention is just as important, if not more important, as an action itself. It should be given judgmental weight.
To use a martial arts example, accidentally hitting someone too hard in sparring because you didn't have enough control is very different than purposely upping the power because you want to hurt them.
In the former scenario, a simple apology and reflection on your power level is all the would be required. No moral condemnation needed.
In the latter scenario, having a stern talking to by the instructor is justified. Possibly expulsion if it's happened more than once and no sign of change is seen.
The same principle can be applied to words. If you say something that you didn't realize was offensive to someone, a simple apology and mental note to not say it again to that person is probably all that is needed.
However, if you purposely say something to someone that you know will offend them, that's a different story. We'll circle back to this concept in a bit.
So ... let's go back and talk about internet influencers. What kind of responsibilities do they have?
There are two things we must consider when examining an influencer's effect on the world. First, their effect on their audience. Second, their audience's effect on others.
I think the first point is pretty straight forward. People who agree with the influencer will continue to consume what they produce, and people who don't like the content will stop consuming it.
It's about now that the free speech absolutists will come out and say, "See! If people don't like your words, they can just leave. No one is forcing them to watch."
And to this, I have to concede that point. It's true. Nothing is forcing someone to watch content.
I think this is why there's a stark difference between how we handle negative words online vs. in person. If someone starts shouting horrible words at an even, for example, rarely will anyone object to them being escorted out. However, people getting their accounts banded on social media for doing the same is often met with resistance.
I think we need to carefully consider the second point. How does the influencer's audience interact with others? And is there a connection to the influencer them self?
There are people who suggest that influencers have absolutely no power over their audience. They will say that even if the influencer directly tells their audience to do bad things, it is the individual audience members' choice to do so or not. As such, it is suggested that influencers cannot be held responsible for the actions of their audience members.
I get the logic here. I really do. Let me pose a counter statement.
While influencers can't be held responsible for actions of others, they are responsible for their own. And trying to convince someone else to do something is an action in itself, regardless of success.
So, if someone tries to convince another to commit a crime, they should be eligible for punishment, even if the other person ends up NOT committing the crime. Why?
Because of intention.
If an action is based on negative intention, then I believe it should be punishable. Consider an assassin. While they were the one to commit the crime of murder, the one who hired them is equally as guilty. The "well, I didn't kill that person. The assassin could have chosen not to" argument would never fly in court.
Yet, many continue to believe that influencers aren't responsible for their content which influences others.
Sure, say a Youtuber uploads a video critiquing someone else, and the Youtuber's audience then goes and harasses the other. It's very possible the Youtuber didn't intend for that to happen. In this case, a simple apology and perhaps a note to their audience to cease the harassment might be sufficient.
However, if the Youtuber continues to upload content about that person, and every time that person gets harassed, now the intention has changed. At best, they're saying "I don't care if you're harassed." At worst, they're doing it purposely.
Either case doesn't say much about the Youtuber's character. At this point, they are knowingly taking actions that are causing others to suffer. And this, to me, is morally reprehensible.
I believe it is our responsibility to do as little harm as possible. As influencers have a much higher potential to reach impressionable minds, they need to be extra careful with their words. Influence with others can have consequences, people need to own up to this fact when it happens, not shy away from it.
As such, I may amend the original Spider Man quotation to thus: "With great influence, comes great responsibility."
Comments