What would happen if YouTube stopped offering suggestions?
What if a Texas or Florida state official ordered Instagram to keep vaccination misinformation that violates the app’s terms of service?
What if TikTok changed the For You page such that content moderators had to approve films before they could be displayed?
This week, the Supreme Court paved the path for fundamentally new perspectives on social media and the internet. The court is expected to hear up to three cases this term on the legal safeguards that social media companies have utilized to monopolize their respective industries and over the companies’ current unrestricted control over online speech, entertainment, and information.
Its decisions could mark the beginning of a new online reality in which platforms are much more selective about the information they choose to distribute to billions of users every day. In contrast, the court might rule that tech corporations have little control over what users post, undoing years of work to curtail the spread of false information, abuse, and hate speech.
If a result, as some voices become louder or quieter and information spreads in various ways, some portions of the internet may become unrecognisable.
Robyn Caplan, a senior researcher at Data andamp; Society, a nonprofit group that researches the internet, said finding a balance between maintaining that participatory nature