Why big social media firms are not to blame for online dangers

TOO many people blame social media companies for their problems. It is not social media that is the problem but those who use it.

The issue of cyber-bullying is often raised, yet surely people realise they can block or delete bullies. When did parents stop being in control of their children’s activities online?

If someone seeks out suicidal information online, they need professional help. And if you don’t want your child seeing porn, that again is an issue for parents, not the fault of social media. No one tells you which supermarket to shop at, and that is how people should view social media. If you have a problem, you deal with it.

MR GED JARVIS, by email.

Just vote No

THE chairperson of the Electoral Commission, Marie Baker, is on record as stating that a relationship is durable if it is committed, and gave examples of these relationships, such as a couple being invited to a wedding together or receiving a Christmas card in both names. The chair further explained that the Constitution has to be specific, but not too specific, to allow for examples that haven’t yet been considered.

These examples appear to be extremely vague and open to interpretation by the courts. How will a judge decide which relationships are committed or not?

This amendment being accepted by the public will have implications in many areas, such as taxation, inheritance and immigration law, in addition to social welfare entitlements. The only logical answer is to vote no. EAMONN O’HARA, Manorcunningham, Co. Donegal.

Dangerous Donald

EVERYTHING about Donald Trump seems to me to be mired in controversy and questionable conduct. The Stormy Daniels case is perhaps one of the least worrying of the trials Trump could face. Nevertheless, it’s a dangerous situation. The case, which also involves a former Playboy model by the name of Karen McDougal, could be problematic for Trump as it relates to the alleged falsification of business records.

The idea being posited by prosecutors is that the Trump organisation paid money as a kind of fixer, in order to make the issue of these two women go away, then misleadingly labelled this in order to conceal its true purpose.

There are 34 counts of that offence in the indictment.

The issue here is that we could have the nominee of a major party and a former American president convicted of a criminal offence.

Also, Trump was recently making a speech to his supporters in South Carolina and went off the grid when he asserted that he was exasperated by Nato apropos to member nations’ lack of commitment in making their payments towards the organisation’s upkeep. Trump is not wrong on that and I would concur fully with him. Why should the US be the only country in picking up the tab? The difficulty I had with Trump was when he went on to share his feelings vis-a-vis how he would react if Nato was in a position where one of its members, who had not paid their costs, was attacked by Russia. His response was to say that Vladimir Putin could do whatever the hell he wanted in this scenario.

This Trump utterance caused shock waves throughout Europe.

I also believe this response provided us with an insight into the world that might ensue if Trump becomes the putative leader of the Free World. The optics of his recent behaviour suggest a Trump presidency could sound the death knell for Nato. His economic isolationism appears blind not only to warring nations but to climate change too.

I am acutely aware of Joe Biden’s shortcomings but the more I hear about Trump, the more concerned I would be about the unstable and fragile world that we live in.

JOHN O’BRIEN, Clonmel, Co. Tipperary.