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

TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 356 posts

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#201

Post by stale2002 »

tedk-42 wrote: post #116
mwfunk wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because TikTok isn't a nightclub, it's a place for people to put their own content out on the Internet. Not just people, but primarily people living in a pathologically authoritarian state that doesn't allow them to access other places on the Internet that they could put their content on. But even ignoring the authoritarian state angle, surely you'd think it'd be weird and counterproductive for user content from YouT…

The entitlement is too real here. Their platform, their choice for what goes on. You want something better? Go build in yourself. I have no problem with platforms self moderating. At the end of the day consumers speak with their actions. How many TV shows feature dwarfs or people with who are abnormal? Don't blame a platform for the inherit flaws in most of us. It really only serves as a black mirror to the truth.

> The entitlement is too real here.

A platform is not entitled to be free from criticism. And neither are you.

The platform can do what it wants, and the rest of society is free to attack them for it, and cause them to get bad publicity.

And it is silly for you to attack people for giving their opinion on the matter.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#202

Post by sneak »

Instagram does this too, just algorithmically based on likes and engagement.

You can’t prioritize posts in an algorithmic feed without deprioritizing others.

Reverse chronological is the only non-editorializing choice, and it’s not an option on most major platforms.

I encourage people not to donate content to these censorship platforms and to disintermediate their connections with their audience.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#203

Post by catalogia »

afterburner wrote: post #95
dx87 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It costs your time and energy. There must be a better use of your time than trying to shame nightclubs.

I'm responding to people who are using their time and energy saying they shouldn't be shamed. I wonder why they're wasting their energy with counter-shaming?

That user doesn't speak for me; my time is not so valuable today, which is why I thought to spend some of it casually chatting about a social media website I never had any intention of using. It was never my intention to shame you, nor to deny your right to shame others. If you feel as though I've tried to shame you, then I apologize for the miscommunication.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#204

Post by orestarod »

PaulKeeble wrote: post #164
cosmodisk wrote: post #139

I only heard about TikTok probably a couple of month ago,as I 'checked out' from social media platforms long time ago. Now what they are doing is is awful, however, that's already the case across the board. The world celebrates handsome men chasing a ball, women that have more silicone and botox in them than an average lab. We somehow give more attention to someone,who's ass size falls within 9th percentile, than the…

In offices, managers are taller and more handsome than the average. What we reward as a society in the west is beauty, not merit and hard work, unfortunately. Study after study shows the same trend in a huge variety of ways, from believing in social mobility to thinking job performance is about job performance despite the often opposite. But I also think this level of anti-intellectualism is temporary.

There is correlation. Someone who cannot take care of themselves is probably not suitable to lead others. In work, "beauty" regards more what you can alter on yourself than what you were given at birth.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#205

Post by imchillyb »

This is a wonderful example of why no speech should be allowed to be censored.

Freedom of speech isn't a slogan. Freedom of speech means allowing others to say things you don't agree with or like, because it allows your own voice to be heard.

Once censorship is allowed, in any form, it will always devolve into us and them. Us and them is determined by who is running things. They're the us. Everyone else is them.

Us justifies their decisions and actions, but it's still the same ol' story. Power corrupts and those Us' in power, will use their influence in any way that they choose.

Censorship equals tyranny.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#206

Post by ceres »

umvi wrote: post #128
tedk-42 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entitlement is too real here. Their platform, their choice for what goes on. You want something better? Go build in yourself. I have no problem with platforms self moderating. At the end of the day consumers speak with their actions. How many TV shows feature dwarfs or people with who are abnormal? Don't blame a platform for the inherit flaws in most of us. It really only serves as a black mirror to the truth.

> How many TV shows feature dwarfs or people with who are abnormal? Oh I don't know...Game of Thrones (Tyrion), Stranger Things (Dustin), Breaking Bad (Walt Jr.) etc.

And those characters stand out partly because they're not the norm in Hollywood

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#207

Post by dmix »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #152
cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except, it IS a night club. The Web is not what it used to be decades ago. There is no elusive concept as "The Web", it's now just a different way for people to connect, just like going to a nightclub. It's been like that ever since the majority of the world got on it. You say "it's a place for people to put their content out on the internet", but you don't ask WHY they would do that. And I don't know if you have use…

The web was never a commons. It all rests on accessing content hosted by privately owned platforms. The commons is SMTP, SNTP, and IRC. Digital natives don't care about these because they aren't shiny and expect that the free stuff they've been given all their life is an inalienable right.

Rights don't involve being given "free stuff", they exist to prevents it from being taken away. Which is a super popular misconception (or at least misuse) all on its own.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#209

Post by briandear »

swiley wrote: post #178
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The web was never a commons. It all rests on accessing content hosted by privately owned platforms. The commons is SMTP, SNTP, and IRC. Digital natives don't care about these because they aren't shiny and expect that the free stuff they've been given all their life is an inalienable right.

Apple has intentionally killed chat apps other than email and centralized stuff by not allowing self hosted push servers. Don’t blame this on young people, IRC was becoming popular again right around when the iPhone started to become necessary for everything.

Whats App works on Apple, Signal, Telegram. How has Apple “killed” chat apps? That makes no sense.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#210

Post by chillwaves »

heartbeats wrote: post #180
chillwaves wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree completely, but these companies need to make their policies transparent so the users will have an informed choice about their platform. Yet for some reason, TikTok wants to hide this story. Why do you think that is?

Because it's not a good look. They want to use a clean app, but they don't want to see the cleaning being done. This is what people want. I mean, if they wanted to see ugly people or whatever, then TikTok would show them it. It's not any different than Tinder filtering out the duds.

Then why not just leave it to an algorithm? Why the need for editorial intervention?

The person I was responding to was basically saying "let the users decide" but that can't happen if TikTok is lying to the users.

Post reply on HN