Should social media companies be more aggressive in deleting pro-Islamic State propaganda?

"J.M. Berger, a researcher at the Brookings Institution working on a book about ISIS, says if someone feels sympathy toward ISIS, it's fairly easy to follow a like-minded Twitter account," writes NPR's Laura Sydell.

One thing all of these social media platforms have in common is that they would not comment on the record about the issue.

"Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are all trying to address this problem to some degree," Berger says. "But none of them stepped up or volunteered to do it. They all responded to outside pressures, whether it was negative news coverage or congressional hearings or stern letters from people in government."

All of these companies could choose to ban pro-ISIS and al-Qaida propaganda because the First Amendment does not apply to privately owned websites like Facebook, Twitter or YouTube. They do have terms of service, and all of these companies ban violent threats. But for the most part they rely on other users to report violations.

Today's Question: Should social media companies be more aggressive in deleting pro-Islamic State propaganda?

• Thank you!
• Should gun makers be allowed to create handguns that look like cellphones?
• What is your reaction to Tay, Microsoft’s AI chat-bot that learned to be racist?
• Do you support the reopening of a private prison in Appleton?