“Knowledge is power”, and the free and ease of access to knowledge is a fundamental aspect of a democratic society as it empowers the people. Not only does it assist in protecting our rights, but it also gives the common man the potential to learn things that were once only available to researchers and academics. Surely no one in contemporary America will deny or reject the goodness that the democratization of knowledge offers.
But, like with most things in life, there is a caveat—one that is often ignored despite us having daily experience with it and sometimes being guilty of it—and it is the fact that people can post false information, intentionally or not, which could cause harm, financial ruin, and in some cases widespread chaos. A light but very real example of this is when internet trolls created false advertisements that caused people to completely destroy their iPhone by bending them until the broke, submerging them in water, and even microwaving them! Needless to say, a lot of phones were destroyed.
There have also been many other hoaxes that have led to panic and serious injury once revealed to the public, which begs the question of if we should give individuals the same plausibility of truth as we give towards professionals and government institutions? And yet a more penitent question emerges when we go beyond who should be able to give out certain information but then try to dictate what given information should remain in the public realm of easy access.
A common example is when celebrities have their personal lives exposed via the paparazzi or other intrusive recordings, such as when the celebrity Hulk Hogan was unknowingly recorded making quite a few racial statements during the same recording. Even when ignoring the content of his actions, nobody would want private details of their life exposed to the public.
More interesting examples can be seen in situations where the knowledge itself isn’t false or inherently malicious but simply knowing it has lead to less than pleasant thoughts about the person involved. Such was the case for many people as revealed by a podcast titled Right to be Forgotten by Radiolab, in which those who were charged with committing a crime, with some being found not guilty, began advocating for public information regarding their case to be taken down since many had suffered a loss of employment, an inability to gain employment, or became ostracized from family and friends due to the implications of what kind of person they current are or may have been. Unlike in the past where someone would have to spend hours sifting through documents to find such information and even spend more time trying to spread the message, people can now find and spread the information online at the click of a button which is now as Molly, a member of the podcast, states “… it’s there always and forever.”
Should false information be illegal? Should information that invades someones privacy be scrubbed from the internet? Should otherwise neutral and factual information be removed if has negative effects that could lead to repercussions in someones life? The solution is much more complex than what a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ can provide, but the reasoning for both sides is definitely an interesting topic. In my eyes, the reputation we’ve been labeled with from our actions is a natural consequence to whatever crimes we’ve committed, but I do believe that online sources shouldn’t publicize names, especially if one is innocent of a crime.
Kenneth's Blog 