Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, that famous empathy that only left-wing people seem to have :)
https://stackoverflow.com/users/478521/mikhail-edoshin From Russia eh?
Yep.
Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
161–170 of 412 posts
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
But not a custom icon as part of an attack ad calling one of the candidates a criminal. There is a subtle difference.
So Twitter is censoring based on the CEO's views. That's exactly my point.
No, your point was, "It is if you allow the other side to do exactly the same, as noted in the linked article."
The other side is not doing exactly the same. The other side never intended to do exactly the same, and for good measure, the CEO promised that if they did, they would be prevented from doing so, too.
You are now making the claim that, if side X exhibits behavior A, and opposing side Y exhibits behavior B, it is no longer legitimate to compare behaviors A and B - whatever the behaviors are, they are exactly the same simply because they're held by opposing sides.
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any evidence a #CrookedTrump hashtag/emoji would've been approved?
No, but there is evidence that Twitter is censoring certain icons based on their CEO's political leanings.
There's zero evidence of that here.
"No attack ads" isn't the same thing as "no anti-Hillary attack ads". If you can cite the Hillary campaign getting a custom emoji for an anti-Trump hashtag, do so.
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#164Yesterday I tried to post a link on FB to an "Anonymous video maker" that I saw linked in an article shared here. It's just a web based video maker but when I tried to post it I got a message saying "Facebook thinks this is spam" and FB wouldn't let me share it.
Since the page doesn't promote any political view at all we might hesitate to make the leap that they are censoring political views but because the entire purpose of that app is intended for exposing corporate/political/social issues it's a bit difficult to believe FB doesn't have that in mind when they block a link to it from being shared.
I'd love to hear what other reasons they might have because I really cannot think of any that hold up.
Here's the link: http://anonymous-video.com/index.html
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#165The interesting aspect is that conservatives think that it is very likely that social media sites censor their views at a rate double that of liberals. Even if the social media companies were strictly neutral in the matter, it's pretty common for conservatives to encounter left-wing hostility and censorship from other users of social media sites.
"it's pretty common for conservatives to encounter left-wing hostility and censorship from other users of social media sites."
Other users can't censor. That's not an ability they have.
And really, the only hostility I've seen targeted at conservative views are those viewpoints that decide that certain people shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else. And I can very much understand that, if you were told that you couldn't marry the person you loved, or even that you shouldn't be allowed to exist in public, you'd be quite hostile to the people who spout those viewpoints too.
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#166The interesting aspect is that conservatives think that it is very likely that social media sites censor their views at a rate double that of liberals. Even if the social media companies were strictly neutral in the matter, it's pretty common for conservatives to encounter left-wing hostility and censorship from other users of social media sites.
That's a point I hadn't thought of before. It may not be the companies themselves, but the user bases that are "censoring" views
But that's just not doable. I can't go on Twitter and censor someone's tweet.
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#167I lean conservative, but to be honest, I assign only a small portion of the blame to social media giants. Their office areas and leadership certainly lean left-wing, but I don't think that's the main issue. I think the biggest contributor is just that left-leaning people are more likely to be offended by right-leaning views. As a result, even an entirely neutral algorithm focused on retention / user satisfaction will…
> I think the biggest contributor is just that left-leaning people are more likely to be offended by right-leaning views. More likely to have empathy is another way to phrase that.
Your username is kind of interesting in light of your comment here. It kind of argues against your point...
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If it is an actual Facebook employee, I can definitely see why conservatives would think that. It's more complicated than that, though. It takes more than just a report to get someone's content deleted. Take a look at the examples from their moderator training: https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hate-speech-cens... See, for example, the slide about "female drivers", "black children", and "white men" - Face…
I don’t like Facebook and I rarely use it anymore but this set of examples seems a bit contrived I think. Would it not be the same the other way around because of the subset rule? Black women would be protected whereas male drivers and white children would not?
In practice, no.
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why wouldn't you want them to know that it's OK to space out vaccines... Because it's not. Spacing them out means they're getting some later, leaving them vulnerable longer. It also lends false credence to the idea that they're dangerous. In many cases, it may also mean kids miss out on the later doses, because repeated doctor visits to administer them may be unaffordable (copays) or difficult (scheduling, transpor…
I do not agree with anything that you said. However, it is an argument and a basis for a discussion. You state that such a discussion should not occur, and that those new parents should not have access to those (including our pediatrician, by the way) who state that the current schedule is much too aggressive and can safely be spaced out. Denying new parents the opportunity for such a discussion is pure and simple ar…
> I do not agree with anything that you said.
You don't agree that giving a vaccine later means you're not getting its benefits as quickly?
You don't agree that three pediatrician visits is 3x the exposure to the germs in a pediatrician's waiting room?
As for your pediatrician's particular practice, they may simply be avoiding conflict: http://time.com/3726887/doctors-space-out-vaccines/
> And while nearly 90% thought that such spacing out of the immunizations would put the children, and the community at risk of spreading infectious diseases like measles, 37% said they agreed to do so often or always.
(There are also a smattering of whackadoodles in any profession...)
Re: Most Americans Think Facebook and Twitter Censor Their Political Views
#170I can fully believe that. Try for instance to have a discussion here on hacker news about the less fortunate sides of diversity initiatives. Then see how many minutes it takes before your entire thread is flagged and effectively censored.
I am actually surprised by what appears to be HN's explicit censorship of this topic. Just two days ago this NYT editorial [1] was on the front page of HN with 20+ upvotes IIRC, and before there were more than 1 or 2 comments the post was deleted and unviewable. (And didn't show up as flagged either -- just totally deleted.) I'm not sure how many people on HN are aware of what appears to be admin censorship of this t…
I don't believe that it is hacker news admins that are doing the censorship. There is a flag feature and any post that is flagged is automatically hidden. There is a dedicated contingent of users that will flag anything that goes against their narrative.
This happens for articles that discuss China, diversity, etc.