Im having a really hard time settling how I feel about this.
Ultimately, they deserve to be the arbiters of discourse on their own platforms.
This is hard to get behind, because so far their arbitration has been found lacking but also...how tf would they manage moderation. Y'all remember the story of the Facebook content moderators? I shudder about that still, and I wonder what something like this could do to the need for moderation.
On the other hand...I have such a bug in my bonnet over what Twitter is doing to cultures/journalism/truth and what a cesspool FB and other sites have become for hate speech etc.
Isn't this similar to what Tristan Harris has been calling for already? Wonder if the CHT is quivering with excitement.
Weird article, felt it could go deeper but helpful look as I start to digest what this means. No secret I'd love to see a fatal blow to FB/Twitter (leave more room for Readup!) but not sure this is it.
Paragraphs that begin with "imagine a scenario" are usually off to a good start.
Imagine a scenario where the FCC became the arbiter of what was and wasn’t allowed on Twitter. That means Ajit Pai, the FCC Chairman who previously worked as a lawyer for Verizon, will ultimately decide what is and isn’t legally allowed on social media platforms. And, with net neutrality gone, the US government can wheel and deal with companies like Twitter and Verizon to see which is more willing to play ball (and thus have their policy needs met).
Yea for sure. Yet another “who’s the lesser of two evils” situation. Should FB/Twitter make the call in what’s allowed, or should the government? We’ve seen issues already with shadowbanning etc on Instagram from FBs rules, primarily policing female and queer bodies. I can’t imagine the gov getting in there...or don’t want to. It’s a lose lose either way in my eye
It's frustrating to have social media companies suddenly thrust into the position of "protecting free speech" when their platforms and the amplification they provide threaten our democracy.
It's ironic that Trump is calling for them to be held legally liable for what has been said on their platforms because they have been hiding behind that defense ("hey, it's not our job to stop people from spreading misinformation") and using it as an excuse for not treating Trump's very tweets as equal to other people's when it comes to racist comments.
Agree, very lose lose. I guess the only win is seeing two awful entities fight each other. If only they weren't fighting with tax payer dollars...
Yes, totally. I feel like that's what I was wrestling with and you said it way better. Normally I like some amusing irony but in this case, it's a hard pass for me. Agree on the tax dollar fight too, such a lose.
This is so terrifying. I have a hard time accepting that this might actually be happening. I’m responsible for content moderating at a relatively large social media company and we’d probably shut down all public messaging options if the EO truly comes into effect. I’m assuming Twitter and Facebook are going to fight this to the bitter end
If Trump tries to repeal 230 protection by EO, we can immediately assume there will be a bonanza of court activity nation-wide
Im having a really hard time settling how I feel about this.
This is hard to get behind, because so far their arbitration has been found lacking but also...how tf would they manage moderation. Y'all remember the story of the Facebook content moderators? I shudder about that still, and I wonder what something like this could do to the need for moderation.
On the other hand...I have such a bug in my bonnet over what Twitter is doing to cultures/journalism/truth and what a cesspool FB and other sites have become for hate speech etc.
Isn't this similar to what Tristan Harris has been calling for already? Wonder if the CHT is quivering with excitement.
Weird article, felt it could go deeper but helpful look as I start to digest what this means. No secret I'd love to see a fatal blow to FB/Twitter (leave more room for Readup!) but not sure this is it.
Paragraphs that begin with "imagine a scenario" are usually off to a good start.
In other words, imagine if we lived in China.
Yea for sure. Yet another “who’s the lesser of two evils” situation. Should FB/Twitter make the call in what’s allowed, or should the government? We’ve seen issues already with shadowbanning etc on Instagram from FBs rules, primarily policing female and queer bodies. I can’t imagine the gov getting in there...or don’t want to. It’s a lose lose either way in my eye
It's frustrating to have social media companies suddenly thrust into the position of "protecting free speech" when their platforms and the amplification they provide threaten our democracy.
It's ironic that Trump is calling for them to be held legally liable for what has been said on their platforms because they have been hiding behind that defense ("hey, it's not our job to stop people from spreading misinformation") and using it as an excuse for not treating Trump's very tweets as equal to other people's when it comes to racist comments.
Agree, very lose lose. I guess the only win is seeing two awful entities fight each other. If only they weren't fighting with tax payer dollars...
Yes, totally. I feel like that's what I was wrestling with and you said it way better. Normally I like some amusing irony but in this case, it's a hard pass for me. Agree on the tax dollar fight too, such a lose.
This is so terrifying. I have a hard time accepting that this might actually be happening. I’m responsible for content moderating at a relatively large social media company and we’d probably shut down all public messaging options if the EO truly comes into effect. I’m assuming Twitter and Facebook are going to fight this to the bitter end
Since Trump effectively controls all three branches of the government...
It's like looking into the smelly basement and it's so much worse than you can imagine so you just close the door and walk away.
What a cluster.
Truly terrifying, the power that this man holds.