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

Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

pewinternet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 89 posts

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#61

Post by zorpner »

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #15
LordKano wrote: post #6

I'm concerned that it's only going to get worse. Look at Brendan Eich, no matter what we think of Proposition 8, I think it's crazy that his support of a political position that was also supported by a very narrow majority of his fellow Californians could cause him to have to leave his job six years later. It's entirely possible that Eich could become a verb, like Bork. Any one of us could support one side of a conte…

My main beef with the Eich case wasn't the fact that people protested his decision, it was how they did it. The main method of protest was to boycott Firefox. Yet this was a stupid thing to do, because Firefox is the result of over a decade of wide-scale community effort, all done on a non-profit basis, and has been instrumental in advancing web standards. Firefox was also the initial spark that got us out of the sta…

By boycotting Firefox, people were punishing pretty much everyone except Eich.

This would seem not to be the case, based on the things that happened.

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#62

Post by cryoshon »

dba7dba wrote: post #4

I don't want say to I am ahead of the curve or anything but yes I already have started not saying nothing on my social network that's related to politics/religion/social-issues/etc. I don't say yes or no on any of those on social network. I have decided silence is the best option. I do have a real world example too. I used to work with a manager over me who was really cool and worked with me well. Felt he was looking…

I'd chalk up those topics being forbidden as a fear of dissent.

Can't have the cogs discussing things outside their design, after all.

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#63

Post by calibraxis »

LordKano wrote: post #6

I'm concerned that it's only going to get worse. Look at Brendan Eich, no matter what we think of Proposition 8, I think it's crazy that his support of a political position that was also supported by a very narrow majority of his fellow Californians could cause him to have to leave his job six years later. It's entirely possible that Eich could become a verb, like Bork. Any one of us could support one side of a conte…

"Have to leave his job"? He had a job as CTO for many years, and could've kept a Mozilla job. But he wanted the most powerful seat of authority.

With the entitlement of those who attack marginalized people's love lives, he wanted ultimate executive power. Knowing that if he failed, he can trivially drown himself in wealth.

No need to shed fake tears over elite white male perverts who care overmuch about other people's sexuality, and bribe the government to police it. He can live the high life on Alan Turing's back. Instead, there's many people with little money who work all day in places with zero free speech. Who have real fears of losing their jobs.

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#64

Post by drhayes9 »

dba7dba wrote: post #49
drhayes9 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. The strict definition of bigotry is viewing other groups with suspicion, hatred, whatever. So, yes, I'm okay with being bigoted against people who kick puppies. I think the more meaningful definition of bigotry within the context of social equality is an expression of power that flows from those with power to those without it. In this case, the one with power (rich white guy) trying to remove previously g…

Well original article was about social media effectively making people censor themselves. Let's forget about Prop 8 and etc. Do you agree social media is effectively making people self censor themselves?

Yes. I think turning this into a discussion about "Person A supported political position X and People Y protested against it" misses a lot of the subtlety in the piece.

I was thinking more about those times that I've sat in work meetings and been asked if I objected to something and said nothing when I actually do object because I knew few others agreed with me.

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#65

Post by flatdeviant »

tbrownaw wrote: post #33
vezzy-fnord wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My main beef with the Eich case wasn't the fact that people protested his decision, it was how they did it. The main method of protest was to boycott Firefox. Yet this was a stupid thing to do, because Firefox is the result of over a decade of wide-scale community effort, all done on a non-profit basis, and has been instrumental in advancing web standards. Firefox was also the initial spark that got us out of the sta…

My main beef with the Eich case wasn't the fact that people protested his decision, it was how they did it. Causing indiscriminate collateral damage (and using various arguments to deflect blame onto your enemies) until people submit to your whims is a long and time-honored tradition (for example, terrorists). Vicious attacks against those who (appear to be about to) "leave the fold" are also long and time-honored tr…

I was about to make the same comparison.

To me, this is enabled by social media. This uproar against Eich wouldn't have been viral if it weren't for Twitter, Reddit, and others.

The people who complained used tactics akin to bullying: "do what I want (fire Brendan Eich), or else I'll make much noise as I can, and drag your brand through the mud".

The backlash was driven by self-righteousness ("my beliefs are superior to Eich's") and contempt ("his beliefs hurt people, so he isn't entitled to them"). These feelings are timeless and have been common throughout history. The problem is that it's easy for them to quickly spread on Twitter, and then get blown even further out of proportion, either by being mentioned on 24/7 TV channels, or, here, because of OKCupid pulling a marketing move by supporting the backlash.

And overall, the effect is that some opinions and subjects are sadly becoming taboo, and people have to be politically correct or risk having their lives ruined. This happened to Eich, it happened with Donglegate [1], and it will happen again. The common theme in these stories is social media.

[1]: http://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-o...

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#66

Post by mkr-hn »

LordKano wrote: post #6

I'm concerned that it's only going to get worse. Look at Brendan Eich, no matter what we think of Proposition 8, I think it's crazy that his support of a political position that was also supported by a very narrow majority of his fellow Californians could cause him to have to leave his job six years later. It's entirely possible that Eich could become a verb, like Bork. Any one of us could support one side of a conte…

Brendan Eich is a bad example.

Donating to a campaign that uses hateful, bigoted language and false information (Prop 8) is different from just sharing an opinion. I'll think less of a person who thinks I'm less of a person for being gay, but I'll still be civil toward them. That'll change real quick if they support a hateful campaign to take rights away from me.

There are so many better examples, like that mindless, misguided rage against Penny Arcade over a comic that was objectively not about condoning sexual assault.

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#67

Post by wzdd »

LordKano wrote: post #6

I'm concerned that it's only going to get worse. Look at Brendan Eich, no matter what we think of Proposition 8, I think it's crazy that his support of a political position that was also supported by a very narrow majority of his fellow Californians could cause him to have to leave his job six years later. It's entirely possible that Eich could become a verb, like Bork. Any one of us could support one side of a conte…

This is a nonsensical post in this topic. Eich didn't post (or fail to post) on social media, he donated to a political campaign. In fact, social media outcry -- in other words, the opposite of what this article is discussing -- is what actually effected the change.

I understand that plenty of people don't think that Eich should have been ousted from his position as a result of his political beliefs, but your post is not just not on-topic, it is actually the opposite of the topic. It looks like you're using this post to grandstand.

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#68

Post by tbrownaw »

wzdd wrote: post #67
LordKano wrote: post #6

I'm concerned that it's only going to get worse. Look at Brendan Eich, no matter what we think of Proposition 8, I think it's crazy that his support of a political position that was also supported by a very narrow majority of his fellow Californians could cause him to have to leave his job six years later. It's entirely possible that Eich could become a verb, like Bork. Any one of us could support one side of a conte…

This is a nonsensical post in this topic. Eich didn't post (or fail to post) on social media, he donated to a political campaign. In fact, social media outcry -- in other words, the opposite of what this article is discussing -- is what actually effected the change. I understand that plenty of people don't think that Eich should have been ousted from his position as a result of his political beliefs, but your post is…

One of the things noted in the study, is that being on social media makes people less likely to discuss topics in person. I'm thinking Eich is an example of just why that might happen.

The more involved you are, the more aware you are of just how quickly the crowd can turn on you if you say something wrong.

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#69

Post by [deleted] »

calibraxis wrote: post #63
LordKano wrote: post #6

I'm concerned that it's only going to get worse. Look at Brendan Eich, no matter what we think of Proposition 8, I think it's crazy that his support of a political position that was also supported by a very narrow majority of his fellow Californians could cause him to have to leave his job six years later. It's entirely possible that Eich could become a verb, like Bork. Any one of us could support one side of a conte…

"Have to leave his job"? He had a job as CTO for many years, and could've kept a Mozilla job. But he wanted the most powerful seat of authority. With the entitlement of those who attack marginalized people's love lives, he wanted ultimate executive power. Knowing that if he failed, he can trivially drown himself in wealth. No need to shed fake tears over elite white male perverts who care overmuch about other people'…

[deleted]

Re: Social Media and the ‘Spiral of Silence’

#70

Post by LordKano »

seiji wrote: post #48
LordKano wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was tempted to ignore this but my desire to combat this canard won out. There were more than two sides to the Proposition 8 fight. I happen to be neutral on the issue of whether or not same sex unions should be recognized by the government but I too supported Proposition 8. Not because I want to deny anyone anything but because the way to go about doing it should be legislative and not by having a judicial activist…

having a judicial activist issue a fiat. legislative process and in those states, In 2004, Karl Rove maneuvered "anti-marriage" amendments to voted on in many states during the presidential election season. So, the republican establishment riled up all the religious nutters to vote both for bush and, while they were there, why not vote your bible faith to restrict rights for actual humans too? That's our legislative…

There is one very big downside. Our insurance premiums are based upon the idea that at worse, there will be one working spouse, one non-working spouse and their children (who will at some point grow up and get their own insurance).

Where will the money come from to pay for Elder Smith's four wives and their fifteen children? Everyone else's premiums, of course!

But then, that only strengthens the case for "Single Payer", right?

Post reply on HN