## Instagram’s New Rules: From “Like” to “Like, What?!”
Remember when Instagram was just a place to share vacation pics and drool over avocado toast? Those days might be numbered. Instagram’s drastic new ban policy has thrown the social media world into chaos, sparking an intense debate about free speech, accountability, and the very soul of online interaction.
The Loss of a Digital Trail that Provided Concrete Evidence of CUAD’s Lawless Conduct and its Connections to Designated Terrorist Groups
Instagram’s removal of the account of Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD) has sparked intense debate, with many questioning the platform’s decision to delete the page. The reasoning behind this decision is rooted in confusion about speech, accountability, and addressing anti-Western elements. CUAD’s lawlessness contributed to the more than 100 arrests on Columbia’s campus, and its digital trail provided concrete evidence of its radical and lawless conduct, including connections to designated terrorist groups.
- CUAD’s Instagram page was used to brag about its actions, including vandalism, and to express solidarity with designated terrorist groups.
- The page provided an unambiguous connection between CUAD’s sympathies and its lawless actions, making it possible to separate fact from fiction when assessing the group’s behavior.
- The digital trail made it possible for the public to observe CUAD unfiltered, allowing for the separation of fact from fiction and the building of the case against the group in the court of public opinion.
The Impact on Academic Institutions: A Misguided Pursuit of Safety and Diversity
The Dartmouth College Study on the Effects of Test-Optional Admissions Policies
A new working paper from Bruce Sacerdote, Douglas O. Staiger, and Michele Tine examines the admissions practices at Dartmouth, which will again require test scores, starting with the class of 2029. The researchers found that less-advantaged students, including first-generation college students, those from neighborhoods with below-median incomes, and those whose high schools ranked high on the College Board’s Challenge Index, boosted their chances by submitting SAT scores at or above 1420.
- The SAT is highly predictive of students’ performance at Dartmouth, explaining about 22% of the variation in Dartmouth students’ first-year GPAs.
- Less-advantaged students who didn’t submit their SAT scores had admission rates of around 5%, which didn’t correlate much with their (hidden) SAT results, suggesting that the rest of their applications failed to reveal their talents captured by the test.
- Students who did submit their SAT scores were penalized for low scores, especially those below 1300, but were aided by scores above 1400.
- For better-off students, submitting test scores was less consequential, with their chances of admission positively correlated with their test results even if they didn’t submit the scores.
The Broader Implications: The Need for Nuanced Content Moderation and the Protection of Free Speech
The Need for Social Media Platforms to Differentiate Between Hate Speech and Actual Harm
Instagram’s removal of CUAD’s account highlights the need for social media platforms to differentiate between hate speech and actual harm. The decision confuses speech for actual harm, making exactly the mistake free-speech advocates have warned against for centuries.
Protecting Free Speech While Addressing the Effects of Hate Speech and ExtremismProtecting free speech is essential, but it must be balanced with the need to address the effects of hate speech and extremism. Social media platforms must find a way to promote nuanced content moderation, protecting users from harm while also preserving the freedom of expression.
Institutions, policymakers, and individuals must work together to promote nuanced content moderation and protect free speech. This requires a multifaceted approach that balances competing interests and values.
Conclusion
Conclusion: The Instagram Ban Policy Sparks Intense Debate
In the wake of the recent Instagram ban policy, the tech giant has sparked a heated debate that raises more questions than answers. At its core, the policy was intended to curb the spread of misinformation and hate speech on the platform, but it has instead become a rallying cry for free speech advocates and social media entrepreneurs alike. On one hand, the policy’s intention to maintain a family-friendly environment resonates with many, who see it as a necessary measure to protect users from toxic content. On the other hand, proponents of the policy argue that it stifles creativity and innovation, as talented individuals are forced to abandon their online presence.
The implications of this policy are far-reaching, with significant implications for the future of social media and online discourse. As the debate rages on, it’s clear that the Instagram ban policy is just the tip of the iceberg. The erosion of free speech and the rise of social media censorship have long been debated topics, and the Instagram ban policy marks a turning point in the conversation. As the tech industry continues to evolve, it’s essential that we consider the long-term consequences of these decisions and the impact they have on the very fabric of our online society.
In the end, the Instagram ban policy serves as a stark reminder that the pursuit of balance and moderation can be a delicate balancing act. While it’s essential to protect users from harm, it’s equally crucial that we preserve the fundamental freedoms that underpin our digital lives. As the debate continues, one thing is clear: the future of social media and online discourse will be shaped by the choices we make today.