Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Sensitive Content: Providing a Voice Through Social Media

There are many topics in which bloggers, like myself, decide to write about. Those of you who may not necessarily blog may voice your opinions through other social media outlets like facebook, instagram, etc. (I tend to use my facebook status updates as well). Now that it is 2013, information is disseminated at a rather maddening rate. Misinformation and propaganda is dispensed at the same rate. Therefore, it is important that those who write, blog or talk about certain issues keep themselves informed and make sure that the information they dispense is accurate.

In an attempt to create a small amount of, I don't know, "revenue", through advertising on this blog, I was told that my blogs contained "sensitive content" that was not in line with the requirements to be qualified for ad placement. At first, I had the typical reaction most bloggers or writers would've had if presented with such a rejection. I questioned the definition of "sensitive content". After thoughtful consideration, I agreed with that assessment. The information that I choose to blog about is "sensitive", in that it evokes feelings in those that may read my blog. Of course, when I blog about sports or what some may deem as not-so-heavy topics, those feelings are usually neutral or without much extreme emotion. But when I blog about social issues like race and politics or about the perception of gays in our society, these topics can and do evoke more "sensitive" emotion.

The fact that such topics can be considered sensitive in that certain companies would not want to be associated with any biased views of any subject is understandable. These companies appeal to a broad spectrum of individuals and to be linked to anything of a sensitive nature could damage their ability to reach or continue to appeal to the masses. While this can be sort of a hinderance to individuals like myself who constantly broach topics that may rub some readers the wrong way, it should not prevent bloggers and writers from continuing in that vein. Of course, any hurtful or imbalanced views would be viewed through numerous "filters" and, in some cases, discredited. But one should not be afraid to speak their mind when trying to enlighten others.

When I first started my blog, I weighed heavily in on the perception of our President through the eyes of a Black man in this country and the way I see him being perceived by many Americans, mostly white but some Black and other minorities as well. The terms "racist" or "racism" appeared quite a few times. As I continued on in my social commentary, I dove into the ideas of "Post Blackness" and reverse racism as well. Certainly, these topics can be deemed "sensitive" to those who may not agree with and to those who do agree with my views. The sensitivity that could be experienced, should be experienced because it forces the reader to either evaluate themselves or to analyze the topic from a different, or even similar point of view. When the topic of "double standards" come into play (and by that I directly mean when something is accepted or overlooked when done by one person or one group of people but rejected and/ or subjected to criticism or prosecution when done by others) sides are quickly taken to debate the reality or acceptability of these standards. Case in point: just today, it was announced that singer Lauryn Hill, formerly of the Fugees, was sentenced to 3 months imprisonment for failure to pay taxes over the course of a number of years. Even though she paid $970,000 over the course of a few days, she was still given jail time and will be on probation for 1 year and under house confinement for the first three months after her release. She will also be required to pay an additional $60,000 fine. Just recently, actor Wesley Snipes was released from prison after serving over two years for a misdemeanor tax charge of "willfully failing to pay taxes", even after being acquitted of felony tax fraud and conspiracy charges. Snipes had admitted to his failure to pay, saying that he was going on the advice of his accountant. Snipes offered to pay the entire amount owed but that offer was rejected, along with his request for an appeal, citing that the prison term was too lengthy for the misdemeanor he was charged with. The truth of this particular matter is this: These were statement convictions and sentences. These were two Black entertainers who challenged what many people in this country, Black and white, consider to be an unconstitutional institution where individuals are required to pay a tax on income they earn through their own hard work. Of course, it is usually the people with the most money who try to evade paying taxes, and most of them are successful at doing so. There are people who, instead of defiantly refusing to pay taxes, hire tax lawyers to show them how to beat the system. They avoid criminal charges because they either are among the "privileged class" in this country of unaccountable wealthy white Americans or they are given an opportunity to pay and save face. Those few who are held accountable, we either do not hear about (and this is the benefit of the doubt being given by me) or they are held for relatively short periods of time in facilities hardly considered "prison". Now, I personally only know about the situations that are reported, so I admit that my point of view is a bit limited. But with the Wall Street corruption that has been revealed that plunged this country into the recession we are just climbing out of to the countless legislators that fight tooth and nail for millionaires and billionaires to avoid paying fair percentages of their due tax responsibilities, I feel that this viewpoint is not far off.

But I digress. This particular post is about sensitive content. Social media gives everyone a chance to air out their grievances on pretty much everything, from personal relationship drama to topics like I discussed in the previous paragraph. And even though, at times, individuals tend to run amok without filter, spewing hate and bigotry in an attempt to hurt those who may hear or read their words, not everyone has that on their agenda. Having ones blog listed as containing "sensitive content" isn't necessarily a bad thing. It just means that there might be some folks who may not agree with your opinion. And that you will not be able to get some advertising dollars along the way.

2 comments:

  1. Max I would have to agree with you 110% on this. "sensitive content" is just another synonym for "there's some truth in this and you don't need to read it". I can't say that I read blogs but I can say that media is so filtered and dumbed down that when truth hits someone in the chest, it takes the wind out of them and that is when they feel attacked. Truth always opens people up, even if they don't like it. Conspiracies, racism, cover-ups, political agendas, are all deemed sensitive content because, if you dig enough someone is going to be exposed and those sitting high can't risk it so mussel those who have the intellect, drive, and eyes to see "it" for what "it" is. Keep doing you, digging, speaking, blogging, writing, looking for those soft spots, its how the revolution will happen. . .CP Upstate Rah!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sensitive Content? My blog has a warning to just look at it. A few fucks here, a bitch there; that's all it takes. If you speak without offending, you're wasting your voice. I live in that space.

    ReplyDelete