Occasionally
a person
feels like
standing up for the good and condemning the obscene.
Model a low-cost moral pose.
Donate a kidney after the patient dies.
Be righteous in the shekel.
Talk nicely and wait for the applause.
And best of all: talk nicely about the importance of beautiful speech.
Warn against bullying on social networks.
And if we're already around, why not warn against social networking in principle.
In any case, it is customary in some circles to turn up their noses in the face of the horrible and horrible things that are happening on the Internet, and they have long been given the appropriate signs in the IDF, ie: Pike News and hate speech.
And of course children.
In 2014, President Robbie Rivlin invited an 11-year-old boy from Jaffa to his home, who told of the abuse he had suffered from his classmates.
Rivlin and the boy appeared in a joint video, and the president sponsored an undisputed issue: schoolchildren should not swear at each other, or band together against one of them.
It is not known whether the campaign eradicated bullying in schools.
After all, this is a complex task, which is incumbent on the members of the educational staff and the parents.
But leading a media campaign will certainly not harm the public image of those involved in the craft.
Maybe that’s why in 2020 Rivlin joined the Ministry of Education, and celebs like Lake Bohbot and Noa Kirl.
Everyone gathered under the hashtag "Do not stand aside", in a campaign that this time aims to "raise awareness of the issue of violent bullying common among children and teenagers on social networks and call for an end to it."
The year 2021 has not yet faded, and the new president, Yitzhak Herzog, is also mobilizing to fight the horrors of the network, and this time to protect adults, and not for nothing - the most powerful and famous among them. Herzog is a member of the meta-Facebook company, and together they launched the "Think Well" campaign. It aims to "flood millions of followers with the difficulty of reading harsh responses, encourage people to think twice before using abusive and violent language, and think positive thoughts before writing a response. This is to raise public awareness of the consequences of cyberbullying, and to encourage social dialogue." As part of the campaign, participants read offensive comments they received online. On the list of the offended: Herzog himself, Naftali Bennett, Yair Lapid, Ayelet Shaked, some MKs from the opposition, and as usual - a handful of celebs.
Fighting cyberbullying is controversial like a kitten curled up with a puppy under the wings of a downy duckling.
There has to be a maniac to oppose him but I will still ask - who is this campaign meant to protect?
Presidents, ministers and prime ministers are not exactly porcelain miniatures.
If there are those whose duty it is to absorb freedom of expression to the fullest of its prickly power, then they are powerful leaders, elected by the public and employed by it.
And if they shed a tear when a citizen curses them from the stands - let them take a tissue and face it.
Cabinet ministers have no right to come whining on the shoulders of citizens for reasons of insult.
Freedom of expression is a value several times more important than the feelings of elected officials or of a president.
And in general there is a limit to the political and emotional capital that can be obtained from rude talkbacks.
I do not want to brag (obviously he wants to!) But I have experience with swearing online, and if I do not do a whining campaign about it - then Boozie and Bennett and Lapid can also relax.
But in any case, the
main characteristic of the networks is not hurting emotions. True, there is a price and there are dangers to digging too deeply of the human race on the virtual plane, especially of children and adolescents. This is a task for parents in particular. But alongside the dangers, Facebook and Twitter have managed, not entirely intentionally, to break the monopoly of the official media, grant freedom of expression to the public that had hitherto had to settle for letters to the system, and create new channels of content delivery.
There is no greater contribution to democracy, to freedom of expression and to giving voice to the silenced, than that of social networks. It is true that one can find false news, lies or hatred in them, but no more than what emanates from the institutionalized media, or from politicians who are fond of the above-mentioned media. To their dismay, it turns out that there are people in the world who compete with them for setting an agenda, for checking facts, for political and social preferences, and they are more numerous than might be suspected before they were given access to a keyboard.
Facebook and Twitter have been in crisis in recent years due to the well-known frustration of the creator and the golem.
The creator is right and developed in his own eyes, and the golem - well, you already know alone.
As is the way of puppets he voted for Trump, or Bibi or Urban or Brexit.
Networks mobilized for the right side and fought back a war against the mob: Trump permanently blocked, a newspaper that published unflattering news about Biden and his son - blocked before the election, expelled tweeters who insisted on the existence of biological women, and yet the puppets refuse to disappear or give up the freedom granted .
China has no difficulty in controlling the
puppets as it heavily monitors all social networks, as well as other activities of its citizens.
To be on the safe side, it also limits the number of hours minors are allowed to play computer games.
China wants to conquer the world, and can not afford plump, unsocial men who know how to do nothing in the real world.
In the West, more delicate approaches need to be taken to achieve a desired political outcome.
Admitting a political bias will bring legal and economic restrictions on networks, and who needs it.
And here the tormented faces and shock from "Pike News", "hate speech", "incitement" or just "violation of community rules" serve as an effective camouflage system for the real campaign.
Remember, no one really cares about some puppets cursing, for it is all about photogenic opportunism.
But the more the real and especially invented dangers of freedom of expression are emphasized, the easier it may be to correct the mistake that gave us it in the first place.
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us