Social Media Censorship

Social Media Censorship

Social Media Censorship

Social media censorship should be extremely limited and not violate anyone’s free speech rights. I understand that some things need to be censored, if it promotes violence, death, and bullying among other vices. However, I do not believe that social media should be censored too much, as many people get their news from social media.

Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right provided under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Democratic societies are defined by the abilities of their people to speak freely and express their opinions. Pursuant to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone is entitled to freedom of expression and opinion, which includes freedom to impart, receive and seek ideas and information through any media. According to Mahmoud (2017), the media has always been regarded as a fourth state in democratic societies. In fact, the media is regarded as the backbone and bedrock of a democratic society. Furthermore, objectivity and truth are the main pillars of journalism and that they are deeply rooted in the profession. Media plays an important role in seeking the truth and reporting as it is, without the alteration of the story in a manner that may be beneficial to one individual or group over another. Essentially, the media should reflect diversity, enhance critical judgment, provide voice for the voiceless, and report the truth. Both freedom of speech and the media should co-exist in any democracy. Freedom of speech has always been protected by the law since its establishment under the Constitution.

Notably, the right to freedom of expression and speech has a long history. Traditionally, freedom of expression has been exercised in different platforms ranging from print journalism, coffee house gatherings, public protests, pamphlets and broadcast media. Social media is just the latest platform where people can exercise their freedom of expression in criticizing the government, debating on pressing political and social issues, and exchanging ideas. Today, most Americans rely in social media for news. Approximately 59% of Americans get their news form Twitter, Facebook and Reddit. 

Nevertheless, there are numerous incidents where individuals have been denied their freedom of expression through censorship. For instance, lawsuits have been brought against the current President Donald Trump and two Republican governors who have allegedly violated First Amendment rights of individuals by blocking them from accessing their official social media accounts. Consequently, there have been criticism that a government agency or a politician who removes negative Facebook comments or block critical Twitter followers interferes with the constitutionally protected rights of the people . The constitution allows people to voice their opinions on political and social media online.

A free and democratic society should allow for liberty to comment and give criticism on existing structures and institutions. Such a society should be ready to benefit from multiple viewpoints which are sustained through various channels of communication including social media. Social media platforms play a very vital role in promoting political participation, debate and freedom of expression. The platforms have transformed the lives of people across the globe and within the United States in regards to the manner in which information is shared. I believe that too much censorship on social media can result to the silencing of people’s legitimate online voices. It is important that social media platforms are not unnecessarily shared so that everyone is free to debate, associate, share, organize, create, meet and learn. The law should allow voices to be heard in the manner that technology has made it possible. 

Social media provides people with a platform to ensure that they raise their voices against bad governance. During elections, information should be shared freely by anyone without fear of harassment or intimidation. Women and marginalized communities use social media as a platform to speak out against violence and harassment and to request for help where necessary. 

Social media will not be any safer or fairer through complete censorship. When heavy-handed moderation policies are adopted by social media companies, it may be difficult to predict the unintended consequences (McSherry & McKinney, 2018). For instance, Twitter’s policy on sexual content has led to the taking down of posts on condoms and sexual health which are beneficial to the society. YouTube’s policies on violent content have led to a journalist’s posts on Syrian war being taken down. Thus, inasmuch as online companies are making attempts to “fix” certain behaviors and attitudes on social media by censoring users’ speech, there are concerns that the policies only end up silencing innocent people instead of making the online community healthier. There are also claims that most high profile cases where despicable content has been taken down involve stories of people from marginalized groups who are major targets of violence and persecutions. Social media has been perceived as a platform for powerless people to be heard and their problems to be addressed; this should not be taken away by taking down their posts.

Nevertheless, there are circumstances where social media should be censored especially where the lives are endangered or where the security of minors is to be protected. Social media should censor illegal hate speech which is geared towards promotion of terrorism. It is unfortunate that social media is a very powerful tool used to spread hatred and violence. Violence is exposed through movies, video clips and music which refer to violent mental pictures of money, sex and rape. Movies exhibit violence through scenes n which people get their heads cut off using knives and guns, and violence against minority communities. The problem is that most people especially teenagers look at such exposures where violence is glorified and get influenced to perpetrate the vice. To ensure that the internet remains a platform for free and democratic expression, it is important to curb such vices that may lead to unwarranted and unprecedented violations (Pierson & Dave, 2016). 

In regards to censorship, critics argue that social media sites such as Instagram have undertaken rather too polished and controlled approach in detecting and censoring “malicious” words (Urkmez, 2017). This approach has an effect of wrongfully censoring political, playful or teasing discussion. We need to be weary of artificial systems limiting our unique sarcastic humor and political opinions, which potentially leads to the loss of freedom of expression. The elimination of some content and deciding what content should remain betrays the basis of freedom of speech which the very platforms seek to promote.

In my opinion, it is important to appreciate that many people are relying on social media to get news. People use social media to receive, create and impart ideas and information to others. As a fundamental right, freedom of expression on social media should be protected at all costs. Nevertheless, there needs to be a balance between the freedom of expression and social media violations. Social media should be censored under limited circumstances where it is used to perpetrate such vices as bullying, hate speech, and violence. 

References

Mahmoud, F. (2017). Between Social Media and Freedom of Speech: A Democratic Society. Medium. Retrieved from: https://medium.com/@fatimaalmahmoud/between-social-media-and-freedom-of-speech-a-democratic-society-580d0df4f2ab

McSherry, C. & McKinney, I. (2018). Platform Censorship Won’t Fix the Internet. Electronic Frontier Foundation.Retrieved from: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/platform-censorship-wont-fix-internet

Pierson, D. & Dave, P. (2016). Social Media Must Balance Free Speech While Suppressing Hate. Government Technology. Retrieved from: http://www.govtech.com/social/Social-Media-Must-Balance-Free-Speech-While-Suppressing-Hate.html

Urkmez, B. (2017). A Discussion of Free Speech and Censorship on Social Media. The Amnesty. Retrieved from:https://theamnesty.org/2017/07/17/a-discussion-of-free-speech-and-censorship-on-social-media/

Obesity in Children

Obesity in Children

Obesity in Children

The primary cause of overweight and obesity is an energy imbalance caused by ingesting more calories while exerting less energy (Swan, 2019). Because of the more sedentary character of many types of job, changing modes of transportation, and rising urbanization, there has been a rise in the consumption of energy-dense meals and a reduction in physical activity throughout the world. Obesity is defined as “abnormal or excessive fat accumulation that presents a risk to health. A body mass index (BMI) over 25 is considered overweight, and over 30 is obese. The issue has grown to epidemic proportions, with over 4 million people dying each year as a result of being overweight or obese in 2017 according to the global burden of disease.” (WHO, paras.1)

Body mass index (BMI) is a popular method for determining childhood weight status. The body mass index (BMI) is a common, affordable, if imprecise, measure of obesity that is calculated by dividing a person’s weight in kilograms by the square of his or her height in meters. A BMI of 25 kg/m2 is considered overweight, a BMI of 30 obese, and a BMI of 40 extremely (morbidly) obese (Swan, 2019). The BMI of a person is calculated by dividing their weight in kilograms by their height in meters squared. BMI is age- and sex-specific for children and teenagers and is commonly referred to as BMI-for-age (CDC, 2021). The weight status of a kid differs from the BMI categories of adults. The body composition of children changes with age and differs between boys and girls. As a result, BMI values in children and adolescents must be presented relative to other children of the same age and gender (CDC, 2021). BMI is a viable alternative to direct measurements of body fat (CDC, 2021). Regular, opt-in population-level surveys of children’s height and weight enable for the tracking of historical trends, geographical distributions, and, if measurements can be connected to de-identified personal data, correlations with socioeconomic status, surroundings, and health consequences (Swan, 2019).

References

CDC. (2021, June 21). Defining Childhood Weight Status: BMI for Children and Teens. Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/childhood/defining.html

Swan, J. (2019, March 26). Obesity in America: Management and Treatment in Children, Adolescents, and Adults. Retrieved from Wild Iris Medical Education: https://wildirismedicaleducation.com/courses/obesity-adults-children-ceu

WHO. (paras.1). obesity. Retrieved from WHO: https://www.who.int/health-topics/obesity#tab=tab_1

Labor Relations System

Labor Relations System 

Labor Relations System 

Public and Private Sector in the Labor Relations System

While their techniques are basically similar, public and private unions serve different sectors of the economy. Employees in the private sector generally work for corporations or non-profit organizations. Employers in the public sector recruit people to carry out official responsibilities and provide public services such as law enforcement, public education, and public safety (Raines, 2019). Because public sector employers are government entities, the constitution provides some rights to public employees that private sector employees do not have. However, some public sector employees’ rights, including union activity and speech, are curtailed in order for government agencies to execute their responsibilities and because these personnel frequently hold positions of trust in society.

Labor Relations System

The rates of membership in private and public unions are perhaps the most measurable difference between the two. Private membership rates peaked in the 1940s, when around 33.9 percent of all private sector employees were unionized (Glass, 2019). During the golden years of private unionization, public union membership was low, with only 9.8 percent. Today, though, those figures are nearly reversed. According to research, public union membership is around 34.4 percent; public unions represent 27.4 percent of local government employees, 29.6 percent of state employees, and 40.3 percent of federal employees (Glass, 2019). In comparison, private unions now represent only 6.4 percent of private sector workers. Despite disparities in membership rates, private unions still have a modest advantage in total member count (7.4 million) over public unions (7.1 million) (Glass, 2019).

There are a number of factors that separate the public and private sectors of the labour relations system. For example, Collective bargaining exists in the public sector, which is anti-democratic in comparison to the private sector, which allows for leveraging unions with the employer (Mareschal, 2017). This is because some employees in the private sector are realistic about the danger of the industry going bankrupt. Public sector labour relations also use political basis in negotiating, whereas private sector labour relations focus on economic factors. Unions in the public sector should develop a communication strategy with their employers that is directed at their interests but is not political in nature (Loy, 2017). 

Public and private unions also differ in terms of who they deal with and who is affected by their negotiation. Because their employment is government-funded, public unions negotiate pay and employment terms with state and municipal legislators, which may create a conflict of interest. The legislation permits public sector unions to donate to and campaign for the election of such parliamentarians. Many governments and municipalities, as well as private-sector plans, have financial shortfalls for public-sector pension and health-care programs. The distinction is that the taxpayers who lawmakers represent are the same people who approve collective bargaining agreements.

Labor Relations System

Moving from one job to another, fluidity, in the private sector provides for more mobility (Alford & Greve, 2017). Furthermore, for those employees who remain inside the same firm, it is considerably simpler to swiftly advance up within the organization because these decisions are decided within the company rather than relying on central rules and regulations imposed by the government. Furthermore, those working in the public sector will have more freedom in receiving a salary raise, with firms able to grant regular pay raises if an employee adequately meets his or her duties (Northwest Legal Advocate, 2017). There is also more diversity in prospective job descriptions in the private sector, whereas governmental companies have a limited number of jobs to fill. The public sector should follow in this aspect of fluidity and especially for city government workers. This allows for fluidity and especially when changing departments and sectors. 

References

Alford, J., & Greve, C. (2017). Strategy in the Public and Private Sectors: Similarities, Differences and Changes. Administrative sciences, 1-3.

Glass, J. (2019, January 29). Labor Relations in The Public Sector. Retrieved from F&H Solutions Group: https://www.fhsolutionsgroup.com/insights/articles/labor-relations-public-sector

Loy, B. (2017, June 4). Comparing Public & Private Sector Bargaining. Retrieved from Study: https://study.com/academy/lesson/comparing-public-private-sector-bargaining.html

Mareschal, P. M. (2017). Public Sector Labour Relations in the United States: Austerity, Politics and Policy. 451-453.

Northwest Legal Advocate. (2017, August 29). Private vs. Public: What Are Your Employee Rights? Retrieved from Northwest Legal Advocates: https://nwladvocates.com/private-vs-public-employee-rights/

Raines, C. (2019, March 06). Private Sector vs. Public Sector Employee Rights . Retrieved from Chron.: https://smallbusiness.chron.com/examples-employee-rights-11103.html

Psychological Foundations of Leadership

Psychological Foundations of Leadership

Emotional intelligence (EQ) refers to the ability to recognize personal emotions as well as the emotions of others. It also involves understanding these emotions and knowing how to use them to guide others. Describe the components and importance of emotional intelligence. Also, identify how emotions can influence performance.

QUESTION 2

The servant leaders top priority is service to employees, customers, shareholders, and the general public. Leadership flows out of the act of service because it enables other people to grow and become all they are capable of being. A brief essay describing the four basic precepts in Greenleafs model of servant leadership.

Psychological Foundations of Leadership
QUESTION 1
Emotional intelligence encompasses the ability to recognize and understand emotions, which is vital in personal decision making and in guiding others. To achieve this, one must efficiently understand the components of emotional intelligence. The first component is self-awareness, which refers to the ability of a person to understand their areas of strength and weakness (Kasapi & Mihiotis, 2014). It also demonstrates the ability of an individual to understand the impact of their actions on others. Self-awareness enhances the ability to learn from past mistakes and to embrace constructive criticism. The second component is self-regulation. This is concerned with the aptitude to control one’s emotions and moods, such that one can listen without judging or think before an action among other things (Narayan and Narashiman, 2012). It also encompasses openness to change and self-integrity. The third component is internal motivation, which refers to factors that influence an individual’s inner passion (Kasapi & Mihiotis, 2014). This goes beyond external rewards such as money and is more about deriving joy and gratification from things that are of interest to an individual. The fourth component is empathy, which is the ability to treat others based on their emotive reactions. It is about placing oneself in another’s position and thus seeking to understand them based on this. The last component is social skills, which are of great significance in network building, communication and teamwork (Narayan and Narashiman, 2012. Individuals with emotional intelligence are more likely to be team leaders and are experts in persuasiveness and leading change.
The importance of emotional intelligence cannot be underestimated, given the role played by EQ in promoting organizational success. Emotional intelligence is critical because it promotes teamwork and ability to effectively communicate with others (Kasapi & Mihiotis, 2014). Understanding others’ emotions ensures that individuals can control their emotions, such that their contributions and decisions are made in a more objective and communication is clearer. Having greater self-awareness is a critical role in enhancing action accountability, and this leads to better performance. Emotional intelligence is also critical because it promotes authenticity. When one is emotionally intelligent, they tend to be consistent in applying their values and judgments, and this creates predictability and authenticity (Dayo et al., 2012). Emotional intelligence is also crucial in promoting connection with others, which leads to the development of better relationships. When a leader has high EQ, they can connect with their followers better because they not only understand them, but they can also express their emotions and passion with ease. Furthermore, emotional intelligence is useful in promoting respect. When an individual understands themselves and others, they are more likely to have self-respect and respect for others as well and treat people equally. Internal motivation is essential in driving optimism and desire to achieve even in the midst of obstacles. This means that organizations can rely on individuals with emotional intelligence in the quest to achieve organizational objectives. Empathy, as portrayed in emotional intelligence plays a vital role in promoting cross-cultural sensitivity, enhanced teamwork, and better services to customers.
Emotions could have a significant influence on individual and group performance. This is because emotions determine how a person feels at any particular time and hence their ability to perform (Dayo et al., 2012). Emotions may either increase motivation or lead to loss of productivity depending on how they are manifested. Excessive emotion may limit an individual’s ability to access specific brain functions, and this limits performance significantly. While positive emotions such as happiness, the feeling of acceptance and joy from personal achievement may increase productivity, negative emotions such as stress, anger, and inferiority emotions may lead to a decrease in productivity. Emotions also affect decision-making ability and the emotions expressed by an individual at any time could lead to different types of actions.

QUESTION 2
Servant leadership has been identified as a significant driver to organizational success due to its influence on how a leader serves and influences others towards success through generosity and concern for others. In this relation, Greenleaf developed four basic precepts that detail servant leadership. The Greenleaf’s model is discussed as follows.
Service to others
In servant leadership, leaders thrive by serving others, hence focusing on their needs as opposed to authority and manipulation as observed in power leadership (Spears, 2018). Servant-leaders are more about service to others and leadership comes as the second intuition for them. Such individuals have great desire to serve others and continuously change their behavior and approach to benefit others based on people’s reactions to their behavior. According to Greenleaf, leadership legitimacy is achieved not by exercising self-centered or power-influenced actions but from the yearning to help others first (Spears, 2018). In this relation, the leader’s greatest motivation is to inspire greatness in others as opposed to directing. This according to Greenleaf is the greatest quality of a leader and which inspires the performance of followers to a great extent.
Holistic approach to work
This aspect of servant leadership focuses on the interrelationship between individuals, organizations and the community, based on the premise that as much as work exists for the individual, individuals also exist for work. This means that individuals need to be encouraged to derive value from their professional and personal lives by being themselves; which eventually leads to the more excellent performance of the organization (Daft, 2014). This explains why servant leaders invest significantly in training and mentorship. The goal of the servant leader is to see the success of others, and this tells why are more likely to focus on employee mentorship and involvement. Servant leaders are less likely to focus on authority and are instead more interested in empowering others to enhance collaborative authority. This is achieved through ensuring that employees are empowered to make decisions based on the knowledge and experiences acquired from the leader. Through helping them realize their potential, servant leaders play a significant role in promoting employee engagement and organizational success. Increased participation enhances engagement with organization’s mission and thus creates better outcomes.
Sense of community
In a bid to provide human services, it is argued that this can only be achieved if individuals come together to promote the needs of others and the community as a whole (Daft, 2014). This, based on servant leadership, is the only way through which organizations can be successful. In this regard, individual servant leaders are vested with the role of promoting a sense of community through their actions. Servant leadership is about selflessness and generosity. Accordingly, such leaders are likely to place great importance on helping others, which plays a significant role in promoting a sense of community.
Power sharing in decision-making
Servant leadership is often misconstrued and could be interpreted to mean lack of authority. Greenleaf, however, notes that servant leadership promotes power sharing, such that leaders involve others significantly in the process of decision making (Spears, 2018). This means that while the leader ultimately makes the final decisions, they do so after considering the contributions of others and what best suits all the stakeholders involved. During problem-solving, servant-leaders involve others by finding out their needs and considering their ideas. This means that servant leaders are more likely to consult employees, customers and other stakeholders through discussions, surveys and interviews to determine their needs and how their ideas can be incorporated in solving the problem. This creates collaborative authority by distributing power across the organization, which could be influential in promoting motivation and better organizational outcomes.

References
Dayo, I., et al. (2012). The impact of emotional intelligence on workers’ behaviour in industrial
organizations. Inkanyiso, Jnl Hum & Soc Sci, 4, 83-90.
Kasapi, Z. & Mihiotis, A. (2014). Emotional Intelligence Quotient and Leadership Effectiveness
in the Pharmaceutical Industry: A New Template. International Journal of Business Administration, 5(1), 15-26.
Narayan, P. R. & Narashiman K. (2012). Emotional Intelligence and Work Performance: A
Conceptual Study. Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, 62-68.
Spears, L. C. (2018). The Understanding and Practice of ServantLeadership. School of
Leadership Studies. Retrieved from https://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/2005/spears_practice.pdf