Censorship and Whistleblowing, Lesson 3
Lesson 3: Listening Task
Focus: Is whistleblowing necessary to prevent corporate censorship silencing political perspectives?
Learning objectives:
- Analyze the role of power and bias in the censorship of information and whistleblowing cases.
- Evaluate how censorship affects the dissemination of knowledge and how whistleblowers challenge power structures.
| Critical Thinking Concepts | TOK Concepts | Reflection Questions |
|---|---|---|
| Confronting Biases and Assumptions: Recognize how bias shapes social media policies, whistleblowing actions, and censorship decisions, influenced by political, cultural, or corporate perspectives. Responsiveness and Flexibility of Thought: Refine arguments about censorship and whistleblowing based on new evidence and counter arguments presented during class discussions or the podcast analysis. | Bias: How does bias shape social media policies and censorship decisions? Responsibility: What responsibilities do platforms and governments hold in maintaining transparency and trust? Perspectives: How do we balance free speech principles with a desire for stricter content moderation? Power: How do power structures shape decisions about what content is allowed and how whistleblowers are treated? | What factors influence censorship and whistleblowing in politics and society? Does censorship protect society or hinder it? Who benefits from censorship policies, and who loses? |
Resources and Preparation
- Slides, attached below.
- Students can create their own discussion around the central question, or you can clone and use this ready-made example.
- Watch the debate video Inside Israel’s Influence on Meta - YouTube (27mins) before sharing with students.
Introduction
Guiding Question: "Is whistleblowing necessary to prevent corporate censorship silencing political perspectives?"
Briefly recap the concepts of censorship (control of information) and whistleblowing (revealing sensitive knowledge).
Ask students to consider:
- Who decides what information is censored?
- Why might someone choose to blow the whistle?
- What are the risks of whistleblowing?
Main Activity
Listening Task
Students watch the video Inside Meta’s Palestine Censorship - YouTube and take notes on the speaker(s)’ key arguments and counterarguments. In the interest of time, videos can be assigned as homework prior to the class discussion.
During note-taking, students should analyze the strength of each argument presented, relating this to their previous research.
Students may also find this article useful: Meta’s Broken Promises
If necessary, students should seek additional sources to support their analysis.
Key Points to Listen For:
- How did Meta’s censorship policies impact Palestinian voices?
- What were the arguments made by whistleblowers like Omar and Saima?
- How did Meta respond to the allegations?
- What ethical dilemmas arise in censorship and whistleblowing?
Note-Taking Framework:
- Main Arguments for Censorship: Why does Meta claim to remove or restrict content?
- Main Arguments Against Censorship: Why do critics argue that Meta is suppressing free speech?
- Whistleblowing Cases: How do whistleblowers describe their experiences?
Kialo Discussion
In small groups, students create a new Kialo discussion around the guiding question.
Alternatively, if students require more structure, clone and share this ready-made discussion based on the claims below, using the suggested claims as prompts for students.
Students should use their analysis to ensure they select the strongest arguments from the listening task.
They should add these to the Kialo discussion as arguments, counterarguments, examples, and evaluations.
Encourage students to refer to the concepts of power, bias and perspective in their arguments.
Key areas to consider:
- What are the main arguments for and against censorship?
- How do power structures (e.g., governments, corporations) influence knowledge?
- How are whistleblowers portrayed (e.g., heroes or traitors)?
- What ethical dilemmas arise in both censorship and whistleblowing?
Sample claims you can expect from your students:
Starter claim: Whistleblowing can reveal internal biases within corporations.
- PRO: Whistleblowing revealed that Meta’s censorship is biased, favoring certain political interests.
- Example: Meta allowed hate speech against Russians during the Ukraine war but strictly moderated Palestinian content.
- CON: Different conflicts require different moderation policies based on context.
- Example: Meta argues that Hamas is a designated terrorist group, requiring stricter moderation policies.
Starter claim: Whistleblowing promotes corporate accountability.
- PRO: Whistleblowing proved how Meta violated free speech and suppressed political knowledge.
- Example: Human Rights Watch found that Meta removed phrases like "Free Palestine" and censored Palestinian journalists.
- CON: Content moderation is necessary to prevent misinformation and hate speech.
- Example: Meta argues that some content may violate its policies on incitement.
Starter claim: Whistleblowing can be misused.
- PRO: People can use whistleblowing to push personal grievances.
- Example: Meta claims Omar violated data policies by accessing information he wasn’t authorized to review.
- CON: The motivation behind whistleblowing is irrelevant if it reveals the truth about censorship.
- Example: Omar found that Palestinian journalist Motaz Azaiza’s content was mislabeled as pornographic.
Starter claim: Whistleblowing can endanger corporate security.
- PRO: Internal moderation policies should remain private to prevent misinformation that could harm a company.
- Example: Meta said these were technical glitches and issued apologies, claiming they were not deliberate acts of censorship.
- CON: If companies followed legal regulations, corporate security would be safeguarded.
- Example: Meta has uniform global policies, where moderation decisions are made by AI and independent content reviewers, not individual executives.
Reflection Activity
Whole-class discussion
- What factors influence censorship and whistleblowing in politics and society?
- Does censorship protect society or hinder it?
- Who benefits from censorship policies, and who loses?
Example reflection questions
- Should there be limits to censorship? Who decides these limits?
- Can censorship be dangerous, such as in the case of authoritarian governments or political suppression?
- How does whistleblowing challenge power structures? Can it lead to meaningful change, or does it cause more harm than good?
- How do global power dynamics (e.g., between democratic and authoritarian states) influence the role of social media in censorship?
- What surprised you about how platforms like Facebook navigate free speech and content moderation?
- Should whistleblowers be protected under international law, or does this undermine national security?
- If you could reform one aspect of censorship or whistleblowing policies on social media, what would it be, and why?
