By Anna Bedell

Twitter suspended more than 150,000 accounts supporting QAnon conspiracy theories earlier this week, according to CBS.

Conspiracy theories are on the rise. They have been the bane of our society to such a degree that people will believe anything they read on social media.

Often what they read is propaganda-driven rhetoric that elicits hate speech and encourages violent action.

A consequence of this is the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, a harsh reminder of how much words really do matter.

Modern society requires a moral compass and code of conduct as part of our social contract. Opinion-based platforms allowing anyone to say what they want (within reason) are finding that a lack of a moral compass and code of conduct have consequences, sometimes dire.

Local Facebook groups such as Bristol Talks have a code of conduct and policies in place for all members to abide by. The group is a community driven forum for information and connecting with other locals who live in our community.

Bristol Talks has seen its share of arguments, disagreement and misinformation among its members, and has had to pull the plug on some users. Often, the action is not quick enough to prevent arguing and misinformation, but there is a mechanism in place to address these indiscretions.

Other groups on social media platforms have the same issues.

I see the consequences at work. I see a division that is like a frayed fringe on the fabric of our campus.

This may well be one of those times we need to be reminded of our history for answers.

On Dec. 15, 1791 – the nation’s Founding Fathers ratified the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution, our Bill of Rights – thus becoming the laws of the land. 

This action was significant for a free society, yet the First Amendment which is considered the most important one of these rights, is often misinterpreted.

The First Amendment is written as follows:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The word “Congress” is the key to what the infringement of free speech means.

The First Amendment applies to Congress, not private companies. It protects individuals from government censorship.

Social media platforms are private companies; therefore, they can censor what people post on their websites as they see fit, according to the Freedom Forum Institute [FFI].  

When Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube permanently banned the former president, and other people, they did not violate anyone’s right to free speech.

Apple, Google and Amazon soon followed by removing the Parler App from their platforms.

Many experts concur with Virginia Commonwealth University [VCU] constitutional law scholar Dr. John Aughenbaugh, who has stated that these social media platforms did does not violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

These companies reacted to the rhetoric that elicited a “call to arms” for the insurrection that happened at the nation’s Capitol on Jan. 6.

Some may argue that social media companies have too much power. That may be the case, however there are consequences for violating policies on any social media platform.

It’s complicated.

Of course, there is an alternative in the press.

According to the Free Speech Center Middle Tennessee State University [MTSU]:

“Our nation often takes our free press for granted. It’s times like these when we realize how critical trustworthy news reporting is at both the national and local levels, on every possible platform.”

In the end, words matter.

Anna Bedell is a contributing writer to TBE and local resident. She writes feature stories about local people and issues.