Social in Medias res
“From tomorrow morning, I will be removing myself from social media until the people in power are able to regulate their platforms with the same vigour and ferocity that they currently do when you infringe copyright.” — Thierry Henry
The former Arsenal and Barcelona player joins several high-profile sports personalities who have publicly spoken out after receiving online racial abuse. In response, Henry published a defiant statement on his Twitter account, vowing to permanently leave all social media platforms:
“The sheer volume of racism, bullying and resulting mental torture to individuals is too toxic to ignore. There HAS to be some accountability. It is far too easy to create an account, use it to bully and harass without any consequence and still remain anonymous. Until this changes, I will be disabling my accounts across all social platforms. I’m hoping this happens soon.”
During a time where social media companies are facing unprecedented backlash over their lack of action to combat racism, one of the most celebrated football players of all time has issued a strong ultimatum.
Taking the knee before a game has become a popularised act of solidarity with the #BlackLivesMatter movement. Other modes of action to eradicate racial prejudice have taken the form of campaigns including Say no to racism, and No room for racism; launched by sporting bodies UEFA and FA respectively. In light of recent events, Arsenal Football Club have also unveiled their own Stop Online Abuse action plan in efforts to protect players and the global fan base from all forms of online abuse.
Living in the contemporary digital world, social media has become an enshrined tool for dialogue and mobilisation. However, such platforms have also become a breeding ground for hate speech. Big tech’s have garnered a global wave of criticism in response to their failures to tackle online abuse.
It would be wrong to suggest that no solutions have been implemented. Most commonly if abuse is reported, the account holder may have their account suspended for a reviewed period of time; usually ranging from a week to a fortnight. In special circumstances, the account holder may permanently be removed from the platform; look no further than Twitter’s deletion of Donald Trump.
Seemingly there is a notion that once the account holder returns to the online sphere following a period of rehabilitation, they will have suppressed an inward desire to spew hate. In reality, this is a short-term measure implemented by platforms to demonstrate a momentary response. Almost like a ‘we hear you!’ Yet, the silence is deafening.
Often those who have fallen victim to so-called ‘online trolls,’ report a resurgence of accounts. Grasping the fact that there are no serious ramifications for their actions, it should not come as a surprise that account holders wield the power to retaliate with further abhorrence.
So what?
Why must the incitement of online abuse be reported, and then go through a process of review, before any form of action is taken? Social media is lauded for its success in establishing an extraordinary connection with audiences, and its ability to give a voice to the people. It is for the people. Why then, do the mechanisms operate against people?
Developing solutions to target online abuse necessitates coordination across people and partners; but a commitment from social media companies is a prerequisite. To drive any form of social change, we must act. But in considering a careful course of action, we must educate. Whilst the dialogue on racism is evidently rife, it is still a conversation many are afraid to have.
Thierry Henry’s decision to definitively quit social media over discrimination may present a pivotal turning point in discussions; old and new.
