Current Affairs Social Media and Censorship

[Tubey]

Thats why we are a bit tittish about streams being posted; quite simply, we are not sure if we/Dan would be responsible for breaking rulez or not, and cant afford to find out.

Yeah one of those where if it's obvious it's not the main point of the site and just the odd comment went under the rader, you'd definitely be fine really. But if you're The Pirate Bay and your raison d'etre is providing links to streams, then you're gonna be in trouble! Not worth the angst anyway.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

It’s a very difficult subject which is going to dominate discussion for many years. Where the general public used to get their ‘news’ from previously was generally a provided as a fairly narrow set of narratives. That’s all been exploded now and people can find themselves believing all manner of insanity but also information that wouldn’t have been easily accessible to them.
I sometimes wonder if those in power saw how things like the Arab Spring started and decided to allow insane amounts of conflicting information sources so no one has any idea what to believe and we all eventually regress back to a fairly ordered and controlled set of narratives.
Powerful nations and organisations previously had control over what ‘truths’ were allowed but this is no longer the case. Feels like the ship has been scuttled.

 

[Tubey]

Exactly. There's free speech and there are some questionable things said, but Danny and Co. set the guidelines (the line in the sand) and they enforce this.

We're given freedom within the constraints that he/they set and the choice is ours regarding whether we follow them or not, with the consequences set out.

If you breech the rules, you're spoken to. If it carries on, you're sanctioned (ban) and serious breeches result in you being jettisoned immediately.

Trump knew those rules and agreed to them when he signed up - prior to being a politician - and as such his expulsion now is acceptable.

If you don't like the rules or the enforcement for not following their expectations, the choice is for us to not use the platform.

GOT and Twitter in theory are the same thing. But in reality, GOT isn't the same as Twitter.

I think the scale of it and the impact on society and politics makes it a bit different. It's a bit like having the same rules for a corner shop and Walmart, with no regard for any variance between how they work.

 

[Prevenger17]

Of course, but then it can be interpreted in any direction you wish if you lower the threshold to that.

Well, this is the crux of it isn't it? Interpretation. In my mind, if you can't interpret the difference between the tweeting activity of, say, Alex Jones or Donald Trump and the tweeting activity of AOC, then I don't think you should be in a job that requires you to interpret things. You're basically veering into "slippery slope" territory here, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Twitter will retain it's huge chunk of accounts that spend all day posting vacuous nonsense and complaining about their free speech being removed.

 

[TN Toffee]

You just can't hold the position that government regulation is bad and also it's bad when private companies make decisions for themselves which is the position the GOP is going to try and hold.

Exactly. The people screeching from the rooftops about censorship because Twitter chose to make an example of their orange messiah are the EXACT same people who have argued to years that private businesses should be allowed to deny service to gay couples.

It’s never about some high minded principle for them, it always about playing the victim.

 

[TheSecondComing]

Yes.

Fascists should be de-platformed.

Censorship is a key part of a civil society.

Yes they should but why the hell are other murderous tyrants on this platform?

 

[TheSecondComing]

Sina Weibo are very efficient at censoring inflammatory posts and tweets. Using keywords as guides to flag up possible transgression of company rules for posting, nearly all deletions are taken care of in 24 hours.

The east has proven to be far better at handling the Covid19 crisis, why shouldn't we look at their methods at enforcing rules on social media too?

Dave you suggesting we go China?

Dave please don’t say you’ve jus suggested mass censorship?

What do you think the minorities in this country think about censorship when they’re being killed and silenced?

 

[Tubey]

Yes they should but why the hell are other murderous tyrants on this platform?

Because they're smart enough to not use the platform to directly and literally call for a coup d'etat from their followers.

Trump did exactly that.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

They need regulating.

Too powerful.

One very quick example should be algorithms should be banned.

Social platforms shouldn't be allowed do dictate what content you see, and what content you don't.

 

[TheSecondComing]

Because they're smart enough to not use the platform to directly and literally call for a coup d'etat from their followers.

Trump did exactly that.

True.

 

[Tubey]

They need regulating.

Too powerful.

One very quick example should be algorithms should be banned.

Social platforms shouldn't be allowed do dictate what content you see, and what content you don't.

Indeed.

For me it comes down to one thing - while I don't have a problem with Twitter banning Trump in terms of the actual facts behind it, I do have a problem with one company having that much power over societal discourse and politics.

If it was a traditional media company with that kind of sway, they'd be compelled to break up/demonopolise due to the dangers of an entity existing of that scale.

 

[TheSecondComing]

They need regulating.

Too powerful.

One very quick example should be algorithms should be banned.

Social platforms shouldn't be allowed do dictate what content you see, and what content you don't.

Unfortunately that won’t happen now.

 

[peteblue]

If you get banned from GOT that isn't censorship, that's just you abusing the hospitality of a place that has been set up for conversations within certain boundaries.

Once a mod always a...............

 

[peteblue]

They need regulating.

Too powerful.

One very quick example should be algorithms should be banned.

Social platforms shouldn't be allowed do dictate what content you see, and what content you don't.

They do need regulating. They are too powerful. I think they should limit the number of members/customers to 2 million per social media, and have lots of them....

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Unfortunately that won’t happen now.

I don't think they'll be trusted to self regulate. Their actions are PR-reactive and inconsistent.

I think as society becomes more self-aware of how manipulative the likes of Google, Facebook and Twitter are - they'll switch more and more to new more privacy driven/non-algorithm platforms.

As an example, Facebook will punish (greatly reduce) any content/post with a link or phrase to competitors, such as YouTube.

They use the same approach on politics etc.

That's a lot of power on whoever has editorial responsibility.

Where that responsibility should be, is up for debate. Personally I think removing algorithms removes the debate.

Algorithms just allow them to manipulate what people see.