Resolving content moderation dilemmas between free speech and harmful misinformation.

ABSTRACT: In online content moderation, two key values may come into conflict: protecting freedom of expression and preventing harm. Robust rules based in part on how citizens think about these moral dilemmas are necessary to deal with this conflict in a principled way, yet little is known about people's judgments and preferences around content moderation. We examined such moral dilemmas in a conjoint survey experiment where US respondents (N = 2, 564) indicated whether they would remove problematic social media posts on election denial, antivaccination, Holocaust denial, and climate change denial and whether they would take punitive action against the accounts. Respondents were shown key information about the user and their post as well as the consequences of the misinformation. The majority

SUBMITTER: Kozyreva A 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9963596 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature