Shuffling Responsibility?

As a result of our policies of freedom of expression and a “free market,” I believe the most realistic course of action to mediate the proliferation of varied and contradictory messages is to teach media literacy to our global audiences. As described by Siochru and Girard, it is the government’s responsibility to monitor the diversity and plurality of media content, but I do not view advocating for media literacy as an attempt by the government to absolve itself of responsibility to regulate the media industry. in regards to issues of safety and appropriateness of messages across cyberspace, government regulation can only protect its citizens to a certain extent. Messages promoting violence, intolerance, or sexual explicitness may be filtered, but they will never cease to be part of our cyberspace network. As O’Neill states, teaching people to protect themselves as consumers by using the media to formulate informed opinions, take full advantage of ICT resources, as well as express themselves through creating their own content is a double-edged sword that simultaneously equips people to become participants in risky behavior.

While people, particularly the vulnerable populations described such as children, have a right to protection from harm in the media and violence on screen, there is a delicate balance between freedom of expression and communication rights. Because of the nature of digital technology today and liberalization in media regulation policies, consumers/citizens must take responsibility in critically engaging with the messages received. So as not to infringe on freedom of expression, promoting media literacy is the most practical way to tackle this issue. Though these terms have yet to be clearly defined and a concrete curriculum established as to how to teach these skills, I believe the project in Ireland that O’Neill describes will provide a good framework to begin with as we unravel this complex issue.