• Different opinions exist among members of the public about social media platform censorship.
• More so, reports say that it is somehow ‘killing the media’ and is receiving some criticism.
• Many people ask: Who has the authority to determine if a user crosses the line?

Although censorship is not necessarily a good thing in all cases, it can be a problem when it means silence for hate speech. While it is not acceptable to tolerate the majority of hateful and discriminatory words or actions directed at vulnerable populations, they should be condemned.

This is crucial for progressive and democratic social media networks that support and uphold free speech. The US Constitution, despite being drafted in 1776 back by the Founding Fathers of America focuses heavily on freedom of speech.

Free European thinkers, and Age of Enlightenment historians understood hundreds of years ago the enormous value that freedom of speech can bring to any society. Many people are likely to recall the recent censorship and cancellation of Donald Trump’s account by Facebook (NASDAQ) and Twitter (NYSE).

The accounts were accused of sharing misleading information (and possibly disinformation) in an attempt to manipulate election results unfairly.

This would clearly be an example in social media exploiting for unjust gains. Reasonably, this accounts for why there weren’t too many people that complained when the former US president’s accounts got suspended.

Decisive Decisions should be made by decentralized communities, not centralized entities

Although we didn’t get too much criticism, it was clear that central platforms had the ability to ban certain accounts or users if they deemed their behaviour unacceptable.

In this essence, who should really decide whether a user’s actions have crossed the line? For fairness and transparency, the community would be able to determine whether certain actions should be taken through a democratic platform.

Alternative solutions to the problem of social media censorship have been developed or launched. Steemit is a popular example. It was launched over five years ago. Additionally, this was the first ever blockchain-based and distributed ledger tech (DLT). Even now, surprisingly, it’s still around today.

Steemit failed to live up the initial expectations. This doesn’t really make it a ghost town either. It means there are real users who engage in meaningful interactions.

Many other social media platforms powered by blockchain, such as Block, are not yet available. one’s Voice has not even achieved a moderate level of success since. The project continues to struggle despite the millions of dollars spent on its development.

Time hasn’t gone, it’s still early days for crypto and blockchain and definitely the very early days for blockchain-enabled social media. Vitalik Buterin, the co-founder of crypto-powered social media noted recently at a conference that it was an acceptable use-case to have blockchain-powered social networking.

On the same note, Buterin again acknowledged that we are yet to see a platform that’s comparable in terms of functionality and user engagement that’s currently seen on traditional platforms like Facebook or Twitter.

What’s Blockchain-based Social Media’s Real or True Value Proposition?

You won’t attract millions of users by simply claiming to be a blockchain-based social media platform. This is something many founders including those of Uptrend tried to do, but it didn’t really work because of a flawed incentive model. Before blockchain-powered social media is able to take off, it will be necessary for a well-developed user engagement and monetization model.

What this means is that the platform itself must be so attractive to people that they’d really want to log in every day and use it in a meaningful manner. Content creators must be given fair and generous compensation for the time and dedication they put in. Most Twitter users don’t get the financial rewards they are entitled to because the platform owners take advantage of them.

Subsocial, a brand new initiative that has been introduced to the market in 2019, is trying to change the social media sector using blockchain. Parity selected Subsocial as a Substrate Builders Program team. They intend to create a decentralized and permissionless social media network that is engaging, transparent, and open-source.

For testing purposes and further refinement, the team released several beta versions. The project aims to make content creation more accessible and provide rewards that influencers, users, and other contributors on platforms truly merit.

In addition to better incentives, this next-generation social media network will aim to be censorship-resistant. It will allow anyone to express themselves and take action independently without the need for a central entity to control what they say.

Anyone has the right and freedom to communicate their opinions freely, without worrying about it being rejected by a particular group. Hate speech is not allowed, but the world needs a safe place to exchange ideas and help advance modern society.

Subsocial and other blockchain-based social media platforms like it should succeed long term. While the current version may not have been fully adopted, it is still a work in process and there may be major improvements in how social media functions in the years ahead.

Continue reading on CoinQuora