It is very important to begin this post by saying, “It’s not about the politics!” The ethical topic before us is who is controlling the social media and what the lessons we need to all learn are from social media misuse.
To greatly simplify the discussion, I will just say Reddit is a social media site that was founded in 2005 primarily by Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian. Reddit is an aggregation site that pulls together comments and commentary, discussion and special interests from throughout the world.
Within Reddit are numerous, “sub-Reddits,” or discussion areas. For example, if medical research or water coloring interests you, there are discussion areas for that. It is estimated that about 6% of all adult internet users have explored or are active on Reddit. Overwhelmingly, the site is Millennial. The age range of the typical user is 18 to 29. The orientation of Reddit is left leaning, as is their First Amendment right.
However, as we look behind the curtain, other facts emerge. For example, though Reddit appears to be a bastion of left-leaning thought, and social causes acceptable to the left, it is still supported by advertising. There is indeed a parent company behind Reddit, the mass publishing and communications giant, Condé Nast. Though Reddit may want to be seen as a bastion of free-thinking, it is ultimately responsible to investors.
Social Media: The Admission
During this last election cycle, Reddit was abuzz (actually still is) with anti-and pro-Trump commentary. Again, this is a country where we should value differing opinions. There has been sharp critiques of the biases of Reddit CEO Steve Huffman. What he was starting to do was to edit user comments that belittled or were angered toward him, and then to direct those comments toward moderators of Reddit’s Donald Trump fan community.
This created a backlash where he was accused of censoring comment. Huffman has admitted to editing comments about him so that they appeared to be anti-Trump. Allegedly, the Reddit team is angry at their founder for inserting his own biases on what should be open debate.
As the driving voice of the organization, by Huffman intentionally altering comments and turning them into an angry political viewpoint, has in turn altered the open forum aspects of the website. He had the opportunity and the power to do this, but ethically there is a problem with being supposedly “open” and in practice, “closed” at the same time.
Even if a social media site is fairly biased in one direction, to change opposing commentary to fuel that bias is unethical as it runs contrary to fair, free and open discussion. Condé Nast has not weighed in on this issue. While some of the media they own are hardly politically neutral, e.g. The New Yorker, the organization’s publications do reach out to audiences across the board.
If your political bent is progressive, liberal or solidly Democratic, go back to everything I have written and change the discussion from politically “Left” to politically “Right.” Change it so that the negative comments directed at the CEO were intentionally altered so as to be anti-Clinton.
The social media is the current “Coin of the Realm” in terms of the way many of us communicate. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Reddit and many other sites were intended to be open. You may HATE what someone has just posted, but you cannot physically “go in there” to alter their comment to suit your needs. When we are able to do this, we take away one huge aspect of what has made our nation so great. When we unethically attempt to shift the discussion to suit our own needs, even the Condé Nast parent company must see the dangers in such a strategy.
YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME!
