Freedom of Expression, Social Media Censorship, and Property Rights


  • Pavel Slutskiy Chulalongkorn University



social media, property rights, censorship, freedom of expression, SDG 16.10


Sustainable Development Goal 16 stresses the importance of access to information. It is clearly emphasised in target 16.10 —“to ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements”. With social media becoming the default communication platforms, the questions of the extent to which their content moderating models are conducive to the implementation of public access to information and fundamental freedoms are becoming increasingly important. Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr as well as Twitter and other social media platforms have been recently criticised for censorship of user-generated content. This article looks at the controversy surrounding these policies from the property rights perspective —focusing on the role which property rights play in securing the freedom of expression. By recognising the owners’ right to control the legitimately owned property, I conclude that social media are not engaged in “censorship” —they merely exercise property rights. There is a difference between a private platform refusing to carry someone’s ideas on their property and a government prohibiting from speaking on a legitimately owned property.

Keywords: SDG 16.10, freedom of expression, censorship, social media, property rights.


Download data is not yet available.


Arendt, Hannah (1958). The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Berlin, Isaiah (1958). “Two Concepts of Liberty”. In: Isaiah Berlin (1969). Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Casero-Ripollés, Andreu (2018). “Research on Political Information and Social Media: Key Points and Challenges for the Future”. El Profesional de la Información, 27 (5), pp. 964-974.

Dewey, John (1981). The Later Works, 1925-1953. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Fisher, Max (2018). “Inside Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech”. The New York Times (December 2018). Available at: <>. Accessed 12 May 2020.

Garton-Ash, Timothy (2016). Free Speech: Ten Principles for a Connected World. Harvard; London: Yale University Press.

Gillespie, Nick (2018). “How Should Facebook (and Twitter, and YouTube, and…) Decide What Speech To Allow?”. The Reason. Available at: <>. Accessed 12 May 2020.

Habermas, Jürgen (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 2: Lifeworld and System, T. McCarthy (trans.). Boston: Beacon.

Hansen, Isabella and Lim, Darren J. (2019). “Doxing Democracy: Influencing Elections Via Cyber Voter Interference”. Contemporary Politics, 25 (2), pp. 150-171.

Kinsella, Stephan N. (2001). “Against Intellectual Property”. Journal of Libertarian Studies, 15 (2), pp. 1-53.

Locke, John (1690/1975). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Peter Nidditch (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mazúr, Ján and Patakyová, Mária T. (2019). “Regulatory Approaches to Facebook and Other Social Media Platforms: Towards

Platforms Design Accountability”. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 13 (2), pp. 219-242.

Rothbard, Murray N. (1977). Power and Market, 2nd ed. Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel.

—. (1998). The Ethics of Liberty. New York: New York University Press.

Schoepflin, Frederick W. (1989). “Speech Activists in Shopping Centers: Must Property Rights Give Way to Free Expression”. Washington Law Review, 64(1), pp. 133-154.

Sulker, Atilla (2019). “What Do We Do About Social Media?”. Available at: <>. Accessed 12 May 2020.

Zuckerberg, Mark (2019). “The Internet Needs New Rules. Let’s Start in These Four Areas”. The Washington Post. Available at: <>. Accessed 12 May 2020.




How to Cite

Slutskiy, P. . (2021). Freedom of Expression, Social Media Censorship, and Property Rights. Tripodos, (48), 53–67.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.