I believe it's a prudent move to protect larger interests. As content has its strength whether it is video, picture, or the written ones. There are two kinds of Social media users - one will create posts and try to get a pat on their back and act like an epicenter to uncover great debate or form people's opinions, there is a second variant of social media users who silently digest whatever they get to see and form an opinion and at times they give a short or broad personal opinion which they deem fit.
Now the post many times gives voyeuristic thrills or pleasures in an innocuous manner, but, many times it triggers hatred, animosity, and bitterness. Irrespective of the nature of content people pass their quick judgements and in the end, social media enjoys user engagement. Thus, while social media knights & barbarians(read social media users) involved themselves into bloodshed with a comment-counter comment there, social media giants have had the last laugh on enjoying rich user involvement.
With the verdict from the legal body, the golden days of peaceful immunity are gone and their responsibilities on the post will not only be limited to deleting the same but to have the accountability for leveraging the post on their platform.
A prudent move indeed!
Comments