The concept of social media platforms such as Google (YouTube), Facebook, and Twitter serving as the modern-day public square is a topic of debate. While these platforms have been likened to public town squares due to their role in facilitating free speech and civic discourse, they are privately owned and operated for profit, which sets them apart from traditional public squares. The analogy to the physical public square is strained because these platforms are designed to serve corporate, not public, interests. Despite their emphasis on inclusion and communication, they ultimately function to serve the interests of the companies that own them[1][5]. The extent to which these platforms should be considered as public squares and the implications of their private ownership for free speech and democratic deliberation are subjects of ongoing discussion and debate[1][5].
Citations:
[1] https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2023/01/the-digital-town-square-problem.html
[2] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/07/the-death-of-the-public-square/564506/
[3] https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/z78xud/twitter_is_not_the_public_square/
[4] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/09/social-media-drops-the-digital-town-square-routine.html
[5] https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/beyond-the-public-square-imagining-digital-democracy
