The Verge isn't the first publication to make this case. It won't be the last. It's just that those making this case frequently turn into brutal dictatorships. However wrong popular ideas are, they're far less wrong than despots.
Twitter is wrong: facts are not enough to combat conspiracy theories
11–18 of 18 posts
Re: Twitter is wrong: facts are not enough to combat conspiracy theories
#12Wait why are we trying to combat conspiracy theories? Have we already forgotten NSA spying was a "conspiracy theory" up until a few years ago?
> Have we already forgotten NSA spying was a "conspiracy theory" up until a few years ago?
Spying has been an overt role of the NSA since the agency was publicly revealed to exist in, IIRC, the late 1950s.
Re: Twitter is wrong: facts are not enough to combat conspiracy theories
#13The Verge isn't the first publication to make this case. It won't be the last. It's just that those making this case frequently turn into brutal dictatorships. However wrong popular ideas are, they're far less wrong than despots.
And yet brutal despots like Hitler are often conspiracy theorist.
Let's look at case. Hitler and the Weimar Republic as a while bought into the "stabbed in the back" myth and believed that Jews were behind all of Germany's woes, manifesting as capitalists and communists.
Re: Twitter is wrong: facts are not enough to combat conspiracy theories
#14Wait why are we trying to combat conspiracy theories? Have we already forgotten NSA spying was a "conspiracy theory" up until a few years ago?
What if I told you one conspiracy being true doesn't prove all other conspiracy theories to be true? It doesn't even affect the likelihood that other conspiracy theories are true.
Conspiracy theorists should be at the forefront of "combating conspiracy theories" because, ostensibly, they should care about the truth, which most conspiracy theories are not.
Re: Twitter is wrong: facts are not enough to combat conspiracy theories
#15I don’t really care what private companies do, and I hope people are looking for alternatives (e.g. Mastodon) as a result.
However, I am finding the authoritarians coming out from the left and the right to denounce basic human liberties in the name of the greater good very troubling. Thankfully, amending the US Constitution is very difficult.
Re: Twitter is wrong: facts are not enough to combat conspiracy theories
#16Wait why are we trying to combat conspiracy theories? Have we already forgotten NSA spying was a "conspiracy theory" up until a few years ago?
> Have we already forgotten NSA spying was a "conspiracy theory" up until a few years ago? Spying has been an overt role of the NSA since the agency was publicly revealed to exist in, IIRC, the late 1950s.
[deleted]
Re: Twitter is wrong: facts are not enough to combat conspiracy theories
#17Wait why are we trying to combat conspiracy theories? Have we already forgotten NSA spying was a "conspiracy theory" up until a few years ago?
What if I told you one conspiracy being true doesn't prove all other conspiracy theories to be true? It doesn't even affect the likelihood that other conspiracy theories are true. Conspiracy theorists should be at the forefront of "combating conspiracy theories" because, ostensibly, they should care about the truth, which most conspiracy theories are not.
What if I told that you that while most conspiracy theories are false, giving people power to censor them would also allow them to persecute legitimate whistleblowers and investigate journalists?
Re: Twitter is wrong: facts are not enough to combat conspiracy theories
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if I told you one conspiracy being true doesn't prove all other conspiracy theories to be true? It doesn't even affect the likelihood that other conspiracy theories are true. Conspiracy theorists should be at the forefront of "combating conspiracy theories" because, ostensibly, they should care about the truth, which most conspiracy theories are not.
What if I told that you that while most conspiracy theories are false, giving people power to censor them would also allow them to persecute legitimate whistleblowers and investigate journalists?
What if I told you that you seem to be confusing the power held by private citizens with the power held by governments, because the former when applied by a social media platform doesn't necessarily imply a slippery slope towards the latter?