11–20 of 34 posts
If a platform would be responsible for it's users and comments. Wouldn't Twitter remove Trump asap then? The guy is a trainwreck online.
At this point we should probably wait until something actually happens, and then hopefully the discussion will have details to be grounded in.
truly wild that the fight over whether social media platforms should be held liable for speech happens the one time they actually do make a feeble attempt at moderation.
My sense is that moderation has been around since virtually the beginning but has been getting more heavy-handed as time goes on. Moderating political views on international-scale open fora, though, seems far newer, and far more troubling. Most of us are appalled at the censorship in China, and yet we seem to be galloping in that direction. I'd like to feel that people will get sick of it and drop off of these platfo…
I think they have an obligation to annotate extremely popular and dangerous comments, but they do not have an obligation to fact check everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My sense is that moderation has been around since virtually the beginning but has been getting more heavy-handed as time goes on. Moderating political views on international-scale open fora, though, seems far newer, and far more troubling. Most of us are appalled at the censorship in China, and yet we seem to be galloping in that direction. I'd like to feel that people will get sick of it and drop off of these platfo…
How is twitter labeling his lies as 'misleading' with evidence "galloping" towards china? I think they have an obligation to annotate extremely popular and dangerous comments, but they do not have an obligation to fact check everyone.
For one, galloping in the sense that probably many Chinese citizens would agree with this sentiment.
Try to imagine what Lenny Bruce or George Carlin would think of all this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is twitter labeling his lies as 'misleading' with evidence "galloping" towards china? I think they have an obligation to annotate extremely popular and dangerous comments, but they do not have an obligation to fact check everyone.
> I think they have an obligation to annotate extremely popular and dangerous comments For one, galloping in the sense that probably many Chinese citizens would agree with this sentiment. Try to imagine what Lenny Bruce or George Carlin would think of all this.
If a platform would be responsible for it's users and comments. Wouldn't Twitter remove Trump asap then? The guy is a trainwreck online.
I think the idea is that Twitter should either moderate the content and be (partly) responsible for it, or it should not moderate the content and not be (partly) responsible for it.
And I don't understand it. Well, I do, mostly it's bigots wanting free reign to be bigots in someone else's house with a little bit of the ideologically inflexible thrown into the mix.
So I should say I don't understand the people who want this.
Not only that but if conservatives do what they are threatening to do, that will lead to an almost instant, complete, and full censoring of much of their content.
Which online service provider would want to be civilly liable for someone posting a video that says "the only good democrat is a dead democrat" if a nut job throws back a shot of hand sanitizer and goes on a shooting spree because "the president said so"?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/28/trump-ret...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My sense is that moderation has been around since virtually the beginning but has been getting more heavy-handed as time goes on. Moderating political views on international-scale open fora, though, seems far newer, and far more troubling. Most of us are appalled at the censorship in China, and yet we seem to be galloping in that direction. I'd like to feel that people will get sick of it and drop off of these platfo…
How is twitter labeling his lies as 'misleading' with evidence "galloping" towards china? I think they have an obligation to annotate extremely popular and dangerous comments, but they do not have an obligation to fact check everyone.
Is it simply assumed that this is some kind of hack-proof process?
Strange to find that kind of sentiment in this community, assuming that's what being suggested.
This is an election with multiple candidates, if he is lying, his political opponent can reply and point out his point-of-view as well as the lies. Given that this is possible, how is it better for the platform itself to start participating in the debate on a topic requiring some other domain knowledge?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think they have an obligation to annotate extremely popular and dangerous comments For one, galloping in the sense that probably many Chinese citizens would agree with this sentiment. Try to imagine what Lenny Bruce or George Carlin would think of all this.
I think Lenny Bruce and Carlin would say they were never dog whistling violence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think they have an obligation to annotate extremely popular and dangerous comments For one, galloping in the sense that probably many Chinese citizens would agree with this sentiment. Try to imagine what Lenny Bruce or George Carlin would think of all this.
I think Lenny Bruce and Carlin would say they were never dog whistling violence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is twitter labeling his lies as 'misleading' with evidence "galloping" towards china? I think they have an obligation to annotate extremely popular and dangerous comments, but they do not have an obligation to fact check everyone.
Without getting into the weeds of the discussion, is it really dangerous to suggest that there may be potential for election fraud through mail-in ballots? Is it simply assumed that this is some kind of hack-proof process? Strange to find that kind of sentiment in this community, assuming that's what being suggested. This is an election with multiple candidates, if he is lying, his political opponent can reply and po…
I think when these platforms become mouthpieces for one way communications, like this case, they deserve criticism for what is said.