Let's face it. Facebook, or any other popular social media site, on the face of it is 'unputdownable'! But the site stirred the hornet's nest recently. And the response it received…well, read on.

Facebook, an enormously popular social media website of late grabbed the limelight when recently employees and students vented their ire against their employers and school officials on the site. These students and employees understandably also bore the brunt of their right to speech! However that is not the debate right now. The wrath and its almost knee-jerk proportions, which the site is experiencing now, seem more sinned against than sinning.

Facebook, too, is one among such popular sites which is marking exponential growth since its inception in 2004. And after it threw its doors open for public, the response has been overwhelming.  Today, 21 million users world over love it and there is an addition of another 100,000 new users every week.

Merits and demerits of such sites are debatable. However, it is more the ignorance or the lack of understanding and apt handling, presumably, which lead to over reactions to such social media sites.  If the site is taken to task because angry employees and students have used it as their ally in voicing issues, how did it mitigate the problem? The problem exists and has in certain circumstances even compounded the grievances.  On one hand these officials are worried that students have used the site to blacken their institution’s name, on the other hand, it is here where hundreds of thousands of students expressed their opinion and discussed the Va. Tech bloodbath, too.

The attempts to suppress Facebook or punish the site users for having spoken their minds on certain issues are unjustified.

Again, companies are entitled to establish ground rules for employees. They are bound to adhere to these rules.  School authorities also can help curb cyber-bullying through appropriate action. But in the face of suspension of such students and firing of employees, one question that pervades the mind is: will it deter people from pointing out the wrong?

People gossip. They will  do, more so, when there is a group.  However, instead of lurking in shadows in the remotest corners of the  darkest corridors, the discussion has been done in these instances in a semi-private open discussion board.  These discussions aim at some change.  The former serves no purpose, as it doesn’t reach the right ears. But are we looking at it constructively? Instead of accepting the wider ramifications of such discussion, we are trying to isolate these voices to snuffle few more that may rise later. And the Ontario government’s banning thousands of bureaucrats and elected officials from accessing the site is mindless. It is a clear indication that the government agency is unmindful of what the public, which elects it, thinks.

The answer, however, does not lie in stifling the voices, or in drowning them.  Sites, such as this, will continue to voice opinions. Hence, the best option is to educate users to lessons on integrity, solidarity, and objectivity. They should be taught the “benefits and drawbacks of social media” and encouraged to use it more effectively, positively.