Social networks represent one of the most important informatics innovations of recent times. They represent a great versatility and adaptability in the complex communication structures at present. The functionality of social networks in all institutions is valuable, since as a tool they are a strategic means to achieve greater coverage and better efficiency in the transmission of ideas, adjusted to the levels of complexity and dynamism presented by global trends in this context.

Due to the above, social networks have been studied and classified by and in different categories. At first, they have a classification called Virtual Social Networks, which tend to be grouped according to the audience, the objective and the theme. These present, in addition a subclassification to consider:

• Horizontal Social Networks. They are aimed at all types of users, without a special theme. They are based on a structure that allows the free entry and participation of users without a defined purpose, other than generating mass.
• Vertical Social Networks. They are based on a thematic axis that allows users to be added. Its ultimate goal is to group people around a defined theme, or a specific collective. This social network has a subclassification:
o Professional Vertical Social Networks, aimed at forming professional relationships among its users.
o Vertical Social Networks of Leisure, whose purpose is to form groups that develop leisure activities, such as sports, video games, applications, among others.
o Mixed Vertical Social Networks, this type of network allows the user, companies, organizations and institutions a concrete means to develop both professional and personal activities around their profiles.

Some theorists propose other classifications, these are: according to the main subject of the relationship and geographic location, it could be said that there are many other categories. According to the subject of the relationship, they can be:

• Human Social Networks. The objective of this network is to promote relationships between people, uniting them according to their social profile and according to their tastes, affinities, activities of their preference, among others.
• Social Content Networks. This network bases the connectivity according to the relationships, which are developed by the union of profiles through publications of the users or files they have on their computer.
• Social Networks of Objects. This network aims to unite users according to brands, cars and places of their choice.
In terms of geographical location, the networks are classified as:
• Sedentary Social Networks. This type of social network varies according to the interactions of the users, the shared contents or the events created by them.
• Nomadic Social Networks. This network is composed and recomposed by the subjects that are geographically close to the site where the user is, the places that he has or plans to visit.

It can be established that social networks not only cater to an audience, but go further and the further you advance in society 2.0, you can see that other classifications will be made to meet other needs or expectations, so you have to be clear about those principles or Basic characteristics of these virtual environments:

• Virtual Identity. Each and every user must identify, each network requires you to create a profile, since that is the letter of presentation that each individual has to enter the digital community. The virtual or digital identity is constituted by the contents that it shares and the interactions with other users daily. In addition, the name, avatar, hobby and others.
• Link and connectivity. Social networks try to establish links with other people, connections of various kinds, which help to create and keep them alive. Users must be able to relate and grow their networks of contacts, otherwise you could not talk about social networks.
• Interaction. This should be the main feature of social networks, since it is what moves them, the best example of their being and social character. It is, saying this feature allows to share information and users are present when communicating and expressing themselves and thus generate more content.
• Personalization Users are able to adjust the settings of the site.
• Real time. Unlike forums and other community pages, social networks offer the opportunity to establish relationships with immediate responses, ensuring continuous interaction.
• Collective intelligence. In the sense of collaboration, joint creation and mutual help inspires the formation of social networks. It is the user who in the community proposes, solves and supports it.
• Multimedia and hypertext language. The language of social networks is the Internet, which uses audiovisual resources (text, image, video, audio, interactive graphics and animations) and links to communicate.
• Virality. The network of contacts makes it easy to spread content, exponentially multiplying its exhibition and influence.

Seen in this way the impact and scope that social networks can generate globally is extraordinary, since from them many concepts have had to be resignified, such is the concept of communication and freedom. Taken as an example of the principles of the human being.

Moving from an analogue society to a 2.0 society has been easy for the natives, but difficult for those who do not understand the way of communication of young people now. It is to say that there has always been some resistance to change, but over the years this resistance has diminished. Since, as dynamic structures, these networks present an expansive tendency at present, being one of the most viable options in the internal and external communications of contemporary social organizations.

The adhesion of most institutions to the use of social networks as a means to complement communication processes has become evident, since they allow the use of the advantages of immediacy, interactivity and ubiquity, which traditional procedures do not offer ; reaching a much greater effectiveness in the performance of the functions of service, research, government and others.

That is why as a phenomenon in recent years, since they are not only used by people to communicate instantly, but are also being used by large corporations, organizations and companies to promote their products and services, it is a broad form of communication , since they have a closer encounter with their consumers.

This expansive growth has been faster than any other means of communication becoming an excellent channel for communications, it is clear that in recent years technology has bombarded us in such a way that it is increasingly difficult to be separated from it.

Seeing how influential social networks can be, there are some that they consider should be regulated. Due to the growing power they have had an interest in different government organizations seek to regulate the use of social networks.

A growing number of legal initiatives seek to regulate platforms such as Twitter or Facebook. But this initiative includes several edges, many of them have a difficult path to travel, so we placed above as an example the freedom and communication because they are inherent rights of the human being.

It is not uncommon to see news about how different authorities try to regulate the networks, arguing that much of the information that is shared seeks to "create chaos, generate unrest in the population". They try to sell, with methodical speeches, to the population certain regularization in favor of their well-being, create matrices of opinions within my networks, talk about programs that allow monitoring in real time and prevent terrorist propaganda; eliminate xenophobic content, etc. And some of this speech has managed to penetrate the live television world: for some shows there is a delay of 15 or 20 seconds, but more, this to prevent judgments or statements that are not favorable for a particular institution or organization.

The regulation of social networks would result in the deprivation of freedom of expression, violates our privacy. With the regularization of social networks we would find that governments and / or authorities would have greater power over people and organizations. In this context, regulations to social networks should always be analyzed from freedom of expression and freedom to information.

It should be noted that we can not lose the little freedom that these platforms provide us, since a large part of them are private, with few spaces for participation and transparency in their policy decisions and terms of use. At the time of exercising an official regularization the little space that they give us would be without representation and tied completely.

Source