Negative – Constructive Speech

Resolved: Government offices should block sites like YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram on their computers

Mr./Madam Chairperson, honorable judges, worthy opponents, ladies, and gentlemen. As the second negative
speaker, I will complete the negative case by addressing the practicality and desirability of the affirmative’s proposal.

Nowadays, throughout the world, individuals depend mainly in social media. Government officials are increasingly
using social media to share information with the public, and to allow members of the public to communicate with them
about matters relating to government and environmental issues. Thus, the Supreme Court has described social media
platforms as the “modern public square” noting that these platforms afford users the opportunity to petition their rights
and privileges, share their recorded daily experiences and thoughts regarding on certain issues in life or otherwise engage
with them in a direct manner. What is truly upright to it, is the free-accessibility and efficiency of it in all angle. That instead
we used the traditional forms of resolution that took days and weeks, perhaps month to receive, it is the conventional
one through the use of social media that makes it easier. Because them and I believe that this resolution is a fundamental
solution that should not be blocked on, we stand resolved that the Government offices should not block sites like You
tube, Facebook, and Instagram on their computers.

Social media is an umbrella term and refers to media being shared on web based applications for others interact
with and has enabled us to create, share, and exchange information, ideas, career interests, and other forms of expression
via virtual constituencies nets as an interactive technology for the past few decades. By doing so, it has cultivated what
we often receive today, “The Digital Rhetoric”. Hence, one can do so by informing, persuading, and inspiring an audience
through digital media composed and distributed via social media outlets. Since social media are not all private entities,
that makes it even riskier. Why? Because it is merely a private public square. An intricate task to enforce impartiality and
protect individuals from corporate tyranny and the tyranny of the mass.

Why we strongly opposed that government offices should block sites like YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram on
their computers? Because it promotes the offices most especially on today’s generation where most of the interaction,
advertisements, and announcements are made-online. First, it serves as an aid in recruitment where it can be used to
publicized job openings or source candidates and verify background information. Second, it market the employer brand
as it can share information including employee events and company values which can also attracts applicants and
customers. Third, it deliver internal communications as it even made available all the informations needed with a
interactive model to employees anytime. lastly, it promote social learning and knowledge sharing which provides
employees and individuals with a way to connect with co-workers and each other to solve problems to promotes social
learnings and can increase knowledge sharing globally. Likewise, it provides additional learning most especially to those
who are used to manual type of working. Hence, there are tons of videos on the internet that helps in giving lessons.
Furthermore, these save time in giving further instructions, provides transparency, and timely to use socmed in
disseminating information.

However, all of these are shortsighted. Let me conclude my side that, government officials specifically the
educators should stop thinking about how to repress the huge amounts of intellectual and social energy that kids devote
to social media and start thinking about how to channel that energy away from causing trouble and toward getting more
out of their classes. After all, it is not as if most students are investing commensurate energy into, let say, their Math
homework. Why not try to start bridging the worlds of social media including Facebook, YouTube, and the classroom to
have an effective and efficient demonstration rather than repressing it to the sense of social security and cyber-fallacy?
Right? It is understandable that most individuals may not be aware of how their actions online may compromise their
security, and by insisting that social media are harmful agents of reality where most frauds and discrimination is rampant,
then let me tell you that these are all good and harmless which always depends on how individuals used and abused it.
Educate them instead as it doesn’t necessarily mean that having online profiles have a high level of security awareness.

That’s all for why I negate. Thank you!