We need to have the freedom to express ourselves without a heavy-handed muzzle clamping our tongues. Disagreement is the backbone of a well-functioning democracy.
For a variety of reasons, most of us have lost trust in mainstream social media giants, including their moderation decisions. How do we know if our posts are really reaching our friends or followers? Or if the reach of our posts is being stifled because of our political/ideological beliefs or backgrounds?
In the early days of the web in the late 1990s (often referred to as “Web1”) moderation wasn’t a big deal. The web was founded with a utopian view and we were typically more polite online back then. For the most part, we were interacting with people we knew in real life or with like-minded online communities and hobbyists. There were no armies of bots and trolls fomenting chaos, funded by governments behind the curtains. There were no politicians, pundits, and rabble-rousers slinging digital daggers and arrows across our bows. How times have changed.
Today, in what’s commonly known as “Web2,” our newsfeeds are ablaze with fury. Bigotry, prejudice, unsavory language, images, and videos promenade before our eyes.
When it comes to political discourse, Web2 is a mess. A 2023 Pew Research study found that “nearly 80% of those in the U.S. said they believe social media has made people more divided in their political opinions,” and roughly 70% said the platforms “have made people less civil in how they talk about politics.”
NEWSOM SIGNS ELECTION ‘DEEPFAKE’ BAN, MUSK CLAPS BACK RESHARING AI-ALTERED VIDEO OF KAMALA HARRIS
The upcoming iteration of the web built on blockchain technology (known as “Web3”) offers no respite—its tokenized moderation scheme leads to even darker echo chambers.
Yet despite these hazards, we must have the freedom to express ourselves without Big Brother’s heavy-handed muzzle clamping our tongues. How do we solve this puzzle in a way that satisfies all sides?
Supporting free speech principles and civil discourse is vital to strengthening our republic. Open discussion is what fuels the democratic process. As I say often, disagreement is the backbone of a well-functioning democracy. As American abolitionist and statesman Frederick Douglass said in 1860: “To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker.”
Restoration Networking strives to resolve the core issues regarding content moderation, safeguarding civility while simultaneously supporting free speech tenets. Imagine our collective sigh of relief when this is achieved.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Here’s the dilemma we want to resolve. First, sites that forgo moderation altogether in the name of free speech absolutism are dead on arrival. They inevitably become overrun with spam, pornography, hate speech, bullying, harassment, doxxing, and incitement of violence. Not only is this environment dangerous; it also makes these sites unusable for most of us.
This has already happened on “anything goes” sites like 8Chan, which was shut down and later relaunched as 8kun. Another site, Secret, was shut down by its founder, who was disgusted by its content. Investors of Secret were refunded their money.
Second, moderation as doled out by Meta, TikTok, Twitter/X, and other mainstream giants remains flawed, biased, and untrustworthy, despite ongoing Band-Aids to fix it. A 2024 poll by Pew Research found that 83% of Americans—including majorities of conservatives and liberals alike—believe social media giants “censor political viewpoints they disagree with.”
Restoration Networking forges a distinct new path to support authentic civil discourse, a key sweet spot for well-functioning democracies. There are a few simple rules for us as users, enforced by the site’s Trust and Safety team: no inciting violence, no bullying, no harassment, no spamming, no doxxing, and no hateful posts. That last rule will be clearly and narrowly defined by the site’s User Advisory Board in a way that partisans on both sides of the political aisle can agree with.
These rules allow people of all viewpoints to engage in hearty conversations about politics, health issues, diets, science, and lifestyles. For one (perhaps controversial) example, what this means is that we can always have a lively conversation about the merits of vaccines. It also means that we will always have the freedom to sharply criticize our governments and political leaders. Web and social media companies in China offer a perfect example of where we don’t want to go: These companies outright ban all images and mentions of Winnie the Pooh, because some Chinese citizens have humorously used the honey-loving bear to mock leader Xi Jinping.
The approach we’re taking isn’t conservative or liberal. It’s American and the foundation of Restoration Networking in the spirit of civil discourse.
Excerpted with permission from the publisher, Wiley, from “Restoring Our Sanity Online: A Revolutionary Social Framework” by Mark Weinstein. Copyright © 2025 by Mark Weinstein. All rights reserved. This book is available wherever books and eBooks are sold.
