Social media controls the world

[YakAttack]

@Menzo

Can we get a five-day head start on not caring what any of Trump’s hellspawn say or do?

I doubt it.

:(

[Timex]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/16/misinformation-trump-twitter/

Researchers have found that Trump’s tweets were retweeted by supporters at a remarkable rate, no matter the subject, giving him a virtually unmatched ability to shape conversation online. University of Colorado information science professor Leysia Palen declared in October, after months of research: “Trump’s amplification machine is peerless.”

“Bottom line is that de-platforming, especially at the scale that occurred last week, rapidly curbs momentum and ability to reach new audiences,” said Graham Brookie, director of the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, which tracks misinformation. “That said, it also has the tendency to harden the views of those already engaged in the spread of that type of false information.”

[MikeOberly]

More evidence that twitter should have banned him years ago. The buck$ were just too enticing.

[Mark_Asher]

I’d be ok with all elected officials being removed from Twitter. Get them off there and get them off Facebook.

[Cosmicat]

I think I agree with you in principle but the counter is that they are 'Public Officials '. What could be more public than social media? Maybe all public officials should be held to a different standard with more strict rules that are enforced…bahahaa

[Soma]

Yeah so because of the Facebook Whatsapp thing and “censorship” of Trump, some of my FB friends are also moving to MeWe, which according to Wikipedia is some kind of rightwing FB.

I kinda don’t want to sign up to anything more and let even more people farm my usage habit. When they say “free” and “privacy focused”, I call bullshit. Nothing is free.

[vinraith]

What’s the over/under on MeWe getting Parlered?

@Ryan_Kelly

Mexican president mounts campaign against social media bans

@Ryan_Kelly

“Yes, social media should not be used to incite violence and all that, but this cannot be used as a pretext to suspend freedom of expression.”

It seems to me this particular Catch-22 ultimately results in social media as a whole going out of business, so I guess I’m here for it?

[jpinard]

@Ryan_Kelly

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-marcelo-ebrard-mexico-media-social-media-a5303f532810447575ccf2af6692a2d4?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP

Mexico’s president vowed Thursday to lead an international effort to combat what he considers censorship by social media companies that have blocked or suspended the accounts of U.S. President Donald Trump.

President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s administration is reaching out to other government to form a common front on the issue.

“I can tell you that at the first G20 meeting we have, I am going to make a proposal on this issue,” López Obrador said. “Yes, social media should not be used to incite violence and all that, but this cannot be used as a pretext to suspend freedom of expression.”

“How can a company act as if it was all powerful, omnipotent, as a sort of Spanish Inquisition on what is expressed?” he asked.

Foreign Relations Secretary Marcelo Ebrard said Mexico is starting to build an international campaign around the issue.

“Given that Mexico, through our president, has spoken out, we immediately made contact with others who think the same,” Ebrard said, noting they had heard from officials in France, Germany, the European Union, Africa, Latin America and Southeast Asia.

WTF! Did he not hear all the awful things Trump called Mexicans?

[Ryan_Kelly]

Mexico’s President, known by his nickname AMLO, is an interesting political figure. Here’s something of a primer on his relationship with Trump:

Mexicans for Trump? Amlo supporters have unlikely pick in US election

[jpinard]

Wow, he sounds horrible.

[sillhouette]

Daniel Dale (ddale8)

[Soma]

I loathe Trump et al and all that, but I’m also a bit iffy about banning him from Twitter etc. outright. There is no explicit incitement of violence or hate. Showing his opinions is like showing the emperor has no clothes.

Banning non-vioelent speech is the classic tactics of dictators, and Twitter etc. show that they are kind of dictator in social media: what they say goes, with no room for dissent.

[Mark_Asher]

It’s an extraordinary circumstance that led to it, the attack on the Capitol. If that hadn’t happened he wouldn’t have been banned.

I don’t have a problem with the ban. I could see lifting it at some point but it was important to try to calm things down rather than worry about what Trump might urge. What if he had tweeted something like, “Anyone who is upset that the election was stolen can act in the strongest way possible and know I’ve got their back.”

[Menzo]

@Soma

Showing his opinions is like showing the emperor has no clothes.

Except that doesn’t work, empirically. Cutting Trump out of Twitter reduced misinformation on the service by more than 70%.

In a world where speech is monitized you’re going to get bad actors. We owe nothing to the people who are trying to use western democracy’s institutions to destroy western democracies.

[Soma]

The biggest problem IMO isn’t Trump, but his enablers. You remove Trump and there are still countless wannabes who can earn a living spreading misinformation, thanks to wealthy patrons. It is the whole ecosystem of rightwing/conspiracy theory media that is the biggest problem.

I’ve been listening to the those (soul crushing) chatter and some of them has some element of truth, like CCP is evil (it doesn’t follow from CCP being evil that Covid came from a CCP lab, but some people are convinced that is the ABSOLUTE TRUTH). The best kind of lies are all half-truths. ANd people generally get more defensive the more you try to shut them up.

I don’t know how to get people out of their echo chamber (like the one I currently live in), but banning non-harmful speech has long been a no-no since, what, John Stuart Mill in 19th century?

[Thrag]

@Soma

There is no explicit incitement of violence or hate.

I mean all he said was “Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?”. He didn’t explicitly say “I’d like you to kill Thomas Becket”. I just don’t see the problem here.

[KevinC]

@Soma

what they say goes, with no room for dissent.

That seems absurd to me, you can dissent all you want. Just don’t foment violence or attack the foundation of our democratic way of life.

[Soma]

This is the article that crystalised my unease.

Should we celebrate Trump’s Twitter ban? Five free speech experts weigh in

[LockerK]

@Soma

what they say goes, with no room for dissent.

Insomuch as they say “Hey, you can’t use our website to spread hate speech or falsehoods about the election, along with anything else we deem against the rules” yes, that’s how the rules you agree to when signing up for a service work. Twitter does not have to guarantee you a platform. Asshole is not a protected class.

And again, all this pearl clutching is about someone who has 1) repeatedly and continuously broken those rules 2) the platform to reach billions of people across the world at any time by virtue of his office.

e: After reading that article I’m equally disappointed with The Guardian for asking such bad questions conflating a social media ban with free speech violations and half the interviewees for going along with it.

[Strollen]

@LockerK

e: After reading that article I’m equally disappointed with The Guardian for asking such bad questions conflating a social media ban with free speech violations and half the interviewees for going along with it.

I agree. This could have been a through provoking article with a set of diverse people who’ve given it some thought, instead it was pablum that wouldn’t even been good post on this forum.