Who should be liable?

Question

Ginger Gorman argued “laws need to change so social media companies are liable for cyber hate”, “individuals need a clear way to sue [the perpetrators + the social media companies]”. See attached article for more details.
QUESTION 
do you think social media companies like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Glow/eve, Google, Quora, SnapChat etc etc etc etc should be criminally liable for cyberbullying + the perpetrator(s) OR just the perpetrator(s)? 
I personally don’t hold any negative feelings towards Glow regarding the shocking bullying I have seen and endured on eve, I see Glow as a “tool” which can be used by many individuals, and for many different reasons... depending upon how those individual(s) use the “tool” dictates whether someone is bullied or not, so I can’t help but feel that the perpetrator(s) using the “tool” as a means to harass, insult, belittle, demean, ostracise, and unfortunately in some cases... kill people, falls on the individual(s) using the “tool” to cause harm and injury on others.

Answer

No. To me, this sounds like the “should we sue the spoon for making me fat” argument. Like yes social media is involved in the process and provides a platform for bullying to happen but it also provides a platform for good things to happen. It’s up to the users to decide which path they choose to take. And yes social media sites should do their best to suspend users who are bullying but things do slip through the cracks. To get back to my analogy, the spoon delivers the food but it’s up to the users to decide if they want the spoon to hold healthy food or junk food

Answer

I think in many instances the social media platform should not be held liable for cases of cyber bullying. However, there are exceptions. If a user makes them aware that they are being bullied and nothing is done or they are negligent in assisting the victim, then in that case i can agree with them being held liable to a certain degree.

Answer

No, the social media sites should not be liable. Using Glow as an example, we’re all here by choice. We can choose whether or not to interact with others. In this room in particular, if you choose to interact you should expect to be challenged. Name calling and outright bullying should not be tolerated, and admin is right to suspend/ban those who act as bullies. But so many times people claim they are being bullied when really they just find themselves on the losing side of a debate. Being told your opinion is wrong isn’t bullying. Being shown alternative sources isn’t bullying. Being told that others find your opinions hurtful isn’t bullying. All of that (assuming it’s done without name calling and threats) is just how debates work in this forum.

Answer

I think they have a moral obligation to try their best but shouldn't be legal liable in any way.

Answer

Depends on already existing laws. I know two provinces have liability laws when it comes to social media sites. 
1) If they refuse to give records or other information that has to do with the case, they can be found liable for inciting. 
2) If it is found, it was reported and not handled properly, they can be found liable. 
In some cases they can be found liable under the federal bullying laws. 
Do I agree with it? Depends on the extent, but 90% of the time the person causing the problems should be liable.

Answer

The reason they are not held responsible is because they are technicaly not a "publisher"  so it can not be repsonsible for what is posted and done. I dont think they should be either. They can not control what other people say on an app, they can just remove when reported, kinda like on here.

Answer

As long as the website/app has proper reporting, blocking, and deactivating procedures in place then no, they aren’t liable. If they are aware that people are bullying and allowing it to happen then I could see how they might be. 
However, as adults (not middle or high schoolers) just delete whatever it is and move on. 🤷‍♀️

Answer

I'm on the fence, on one hand they aren't bullying the person, they're simply supplying the person with the weapon to do so. On the other hand if companies were held responsible you'd see a drastic change to many policies for the better. There would be no more 'this doesn't violate our terms' messages, companies that were brought to the attention of repeated and unnecessary bullying would have to take action against the bully or risk a trial themselves. If this came into effect glow would have to hire more moderators to combat the bullies on glow and I doubt they would be suspensions, just straight up bans, on the down side of that is in cc especially it's not always black and white as to who started it (I'm not having a dig at glow, it's the only social media everyone here knows and glow has been extremely helpful to me in the past with someone trying to ruin my life) so would people be wrongfully banned or would they just delete all groups that may cause a problem. There's pros and cons to each side.

Answer

It is necessary for us all to be vigilant with bullying, either as the 'victim' the onus is on us to remove ourselves from the situation or content, as a bystander we should step in or take note of confrontations, and as bullies/commentators we should reflect on our behaviour toward others and prevent these instances from occurring. 
Back to the topic; provided the app or platform has the reporting and blocking features in place- Then no, I do not think the platform should be liable.
However if a user has repeatedly reported instances of bullying and it is still able to occur or the content isn't removed in a specific timeframe (say 24hrs) then there's a very grey area. They should be obligated to protect the health of their users, thus then become legally obligated.

Who should be liable?

The Top Baby Tracker App: Embrace New Beginnings with Tender Care

The Top Fertility Tracker App: Your Path to Achieving Pregnancy

The Top Pregnancy App: Nurturing Your Journey to Motherhood

The Top Period Tracker for Empowering Your Menstrual Health Journey