Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 889 posts

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#291

Post by refurb »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #173
refurb wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the most part, those "viewpoints" are verifiable falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and other types of disinformation and misinformation. "For the most part" But incredibly, disinformation and misinformation like "the Hunter Biden story is a Russian plot" doesn't get censored, despite absolutely no proof and in fact, evidence to the contrary. Funny that is.

I mean, Glenn Greenwald resigned from the Intercept so he could write about it. That post wasn't censored in any way, shape or form. There were huge threads here about this for literally a week. Seems like a bad job was done on supressing that information.

Huh? I'm talking about the claims it's all "Russian disinformation" were not censored on Twitter.

That's despite intelligence agencies saying that "there is no evidence it's Russian disinformation".

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#292

Post by hiq »

alphabettsy wrote: post #47
lotsofpulp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I recall correctly, he was also one of the very few rich people to back Trump in 2016, when everyone had written Trump off. Which also caused some drama at Rentech.

He had many billionaire donors and its well documented that GOP voters are wealthier on average, this is a list of just the well-known billionaires that backed his 2016 run: https://fortune.com/2016/08/03/trump-billionaire-backers-lis...

> it's well documented that GOP voters are wealthier on average

Is it? I could not find a proper reference documenting both the average and median wealth of voters of both parties.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#293

Post by ThePreacherMan »

nostromo wrote: post #73
ThePreacherMan wrote: post #53

Are there any good information how advertising works in this network? From my experience its easy to convince "free-speechers" to buy things - think gold investment, self defense equipment, prepping, everything with the US flag colours on it.

If you want to make a quick, but cynical buck, start on Facebook. My Facebook feed was full of pins, shirts, mugs, and posters of Ruth Bader Ginsberg with a tacky Notorious B.I.G. crown on her head for weeks after her death. Sometimes they’d even say “Rest In Power” whatever that means. They must have been selling like hot cakes.

These are breadcrumbs, the money are in the big time items you affiliate for.

During the Ron Paul craze I had some Gold adverts printing money.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#294

Post by matwood »

_Microft wrote: post #151
dustinmoris wrote: post #118

In mid October I deleted almost all my tweets and likes (but Twitter being so shit they are still showing my likes except it’s not liked anymore lol) and have not been tweeting anything anymore. I found Twitter too toxic, it made me angry with people for no reason, so I deleted all my tweets and the app. No more notifications, no more “just checking Twitter quickly”. I now go to Twitter like once a day just to have a…

I'm a longtime lurker on Twitter, the list of people I follow is well-curated. If someone looks like they cause me more trouble than insights, I unfollow or even block them with little hesitation. In this form, Twitter is working great for me. Needless to say that I stay away from politics (and related topics) as much as possible.

On Twitter I also mainly lurk. I've found it to be the best place to get the detailed news I want (for example, Wasserman or Cohn for election result), but know to avoid comments unless I'm looking for pure entertainment.

But, I have all Twitter alerts turned off, and only check every few days. I rarely look at my own Twitter timeline and instead go directly to people's timeline who I have found will have the news I'm interested in.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#295

Post by chrononaut »

grey-area wrote: post #110
ceilingcorner wrote: post #98

Big Tech and Big Media really overplayed their hand this time, IMO. Millions and millions of people are now skeptical and looking for an alternative, even from Fox News. It might not be to Parler, or to the next site after that, but fragmentation will continue to happen. Facebook and media at large only have power if they have viewers, which is a far less stable resource than iron, or oil, or other corporate mainstay…

2020, or more likely 2016 will perhaps be seen as a turning point in the fortunes of the US Republic, when the democracy began to unravel, the law was used as a weapon against enemies, and the rule of law was replaced by mob rule with different factions warring in the streets. The parallels between the US at this moment and pre-war Europe or Rome at the time of the Catiline conspiracy are striking - the centre cannot…

Hm.. perhaps in the faceless namespace that is the Internet, but much of that interaction hasn't yet percolated into every day life of the vast majority of individuals. Any person not participating in these exchanges and these networks might not even recognize that these heated interactions are happening.

Another part of the complication (fortunately) is that there is also no "real life" external markers that separate us on these issues. You may know where people stand on the Internet about issues, but step outside and it's a sea of ambiguity with every individual you meet. And at that point, people just go about their day treating everyone with respect. (At least in the same amount they have been the last 60 years, which in some cases is not much respect)

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#296

Post by hntossaccount12 »

LatteLazy wrote: post #223

It’s worth noting that the first thing Parler did was start censoring anyone unsupportive of their form of conservatism. They’re not offering freer speech, they’re offering a safe space. Maybe that’s a seller, maybe it’s not, but it’s an important distinction. This is really just /r/conservative taken to its logical conclusion.

I suspect we will continue to see services that unbundle social media's hottest topics.

Social media may have created an outrage economy -- a subset of the attention economy.

But like ebay, craigslist, etc, the social media platforms' broad focus means their product can't specialize when strong trends emerge. The outrage will be unbundled by niche companies.

I actually think this is a good thing. Seeing conspiracy theories on the same platform as your cousin's family photos, or nobel winners, has a legitimacy-building effect on the outrage content. Maybe on its own platform it will look more like what it actually is. Nobody mistakes the tabloids in the checkout aisle for a legitimate newspaper.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#297

Post by indigo945 »

forgingahead wrote: post #274

If you look at Donald Trump's Facebook account, every post of his (including one about getting a new COVID relief bill to him to sign and one wishing people Happy Diwali) is "flagged" by Facebook with their "helpful notice". Twitter has plenty of their own notices as well, spawning several memes already[0][1]. Dick Costolo, the former CEO of Twitter, made a post about "lining up and shooting" people. AOC recently twe…

    > Dick Costolo, the former CEO of Twitter, made a post about "lining up and shooting" people. AOC recently tweeted about "making lists" of opposition supporters, which was amplified by many others.
The former Twitter CEO is not the POTUS, and while the tweet is distasteful, is it really surprising that Twitter doesn't have the resources to flag tweets by every user on the platform? Auto-flagging works for links, not for inciteful remarks. AOC, on the other hand, wasn't talking about death lists, like you imply in your comment, she was talking about people taking responsibility for their actions under the Trump regime.

    > Whatever pretzel-like justifications one may come up with for the obvious double-standard, the average person no longer believes in neutrality of media or of any of the major tech platforms.
Yes, because the average American is a fascist at this point. This says more about average people than it says about tech platforms, though.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#298

Post by coldtea »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #232
forest_dweller wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Tech platforms are uncomfortable with certain viewpoints expressed on their platforms and seek to limit these viewpoints. Back in the late 2000s and early 2010s many of these large companies billed themselves as open platforms where you can express yourself. Twitter's Jack Dorsey said in 2012 that "We are the free speech wing of the free speech part". Now he says it was joke. The terms of service on these platfo…

I don’t think you have captured their take on immigration correctly. If it is only illegal immigration that is bad, that would mean that changing the law to make them legal would solve the problem. But that’s not what they want.

This is not even an argument.

They don't say illegal immigrant is bad as a legal status (so that merely changing the law to make everyone legal would make it ok).

They say that illegal immigrants are bad for the same reason that the lawmakers made a distinction between legal and illegal immigrants: to place quota, immigration criteria, and so on.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#300

Post by alkonaut »

wyoh wrote: post #258
alkonaut wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parler isn’t a tech startup like any other. It’s unlikely to ever be profitable. Why Mercer and others think it’s a good idea to plow money into it is the question.

Because they're not in for the money but for a space of freedom for their ideas?

If it was crowdfunded somehow I’d think that. This is someone with plenty of room for their ideas (Mercers are pretty extreme in this sense!) so it’s someone making a space for others’ ideas in that case.

But more likely it’s a scheme to create a platform to deliver ideas to a specific target group. Or a way of attacking the established actors and regulation in the space. Or a way of simply creating division. Or (my guess) all of the above.

Post reply on HN