Do you agree with temporarily Banning access to social media platforms as a way to stop misinformation from spreading and possibly causing racial/religious tensions

✋🏼😈 ℕ𝓞т𝐭๏∂คч S卂ţᗩή😈👊🏼 • Peace✌🏼love ❤️and 3 flowers 💐grease(AKA ChiChi The Clown)

This is a continuation from my last post on the Easter attacks in Sri Lanka.

So we’re not debating other countries decision, for debates sake let’s say if this happened where you live, would you agree with the temporary ban?

Things to consider;

Many people use social media as a means to communicate with loved ones.

Even credible News sites can still possibly hold bias towards different religions/political ideologies and “spin a narrative” as to create such tension (at least here in the US this is the case for some)

It’s to keep people safe, and maintain overall peace amongst races&religions (especially after civil war and/or majorly tragedy) and decrease speculation while investigation is underway.

Bonus (kinda related)

I noticed other countries news outlets have made it a point to say it appears Christians were being targeted by a jihadist organization or the inevitable “Islamic terrorist group”. While Sri Lanka has made it a point to avoid that topic due to 10year long civil war they’re recovering from .

Do you believe, if the country in which such a “thing” took place is avoiding that specific type of narrative as to maintain peace amongst their people, should other reporting countries (especially if the tension is similar) follow suit?

Vote below to see results!