32 ms·

Social media is toxic because of its ability to distill extremism. Say you have a person with an extremist view on dating and women - a 1 in 1,000,000 type vie

by umvi 8y ago

Social media is toxic because of its ability to distill extremism. Say you have a person with an extremist view on dating and women - a 1 in 1,000,000 type view. Well, social media gives them a place where hundreds of like-minded individuals can gather in one spot and reinforce their extremism. Then, people with non-extremist views take notice of the community and stop by with popcorn because it's outrageous, disgusting, but above all, entertaining. I think sometimes we overestimate how toxic a community is by doing bad math: "Oh, /r/incels has a subscription count of X and growing?? It must be converting more users to its extremism!! Quick, ban it!" What percentage of subs were just popcorn bystanders and what percentage of content creators were trolls? I would guess much higher than one would expect.

gowld 8y ago
I don't see how popularity is relevant to a decision to content-based ban.
- sosodev 8y ago
  It shouldn't be but it's a factor of how many people are going to notice it and stir up bad publicity.
- astine 8y ago
  It's relevant to a discussion of free-speech absolutism in a public forum. Free speech as a principle is valuable and if the cost of millions of people being able to express their views is that one random Nazi gets to have his say, then I think most people would think that it's worth it. If that one Nazi were to turn into a thousand Nazis, then I suspect people would be more circumspect about the whole thing. So the question about how prevalent hate-speech is on Reddit has a lot to say about to what extent Reddit will be willing to censor its users.
  - 0x445442 8y ago
    > If that one Nazi were to turn into a thousand Nazis, then I suspect people would be more circumspect about the whole thing. Why? I mean what do you care how many people say the earth is flat? As for Nazis, Antifia and whatever other group you care to use an example, it seems like we already have a descent set of laws in place to protect people from direct harm from those groups. I'm sorry but I think what's going on at these social media companies and with the legacy media is blatant political censorship.

by umvi 8y ago

gowld 8y ago

I don't see how popularity is relevant to a decision to content-based ban.

sosodev 8y ago
It shouldn't be but it's a factor of how many people are going to notice it and stir up bad publicity.
astine 8y ago
It's relevant to a discussion of free-speech absolutism in a public forum. Free speech as a principle is valuable and if the cost of millions of people being able to express their views is that one random Nazi gets to have his say, then I think most people would think that it's worth it. If that one Nazi were to turn into a thousand Nazis, then I suspect people would be more circumspect about the whole thing. So the question about how prevalent hate-speech is on Reddit has a lot to say about to what extent Reddit will be willing to censor its users.
- 0x445442 8y ago
  > If that one Nazi were to turn into a thousand Nazis, then I suspect people would be more circumspect about the whole thing. Why? I mean what do you care how many people say the earth is flat? As for Nazis, Antifia and whatever other group you care to use an example, it seems like we already have a descent set of laws in place to protect people from direct harm from those groups. I'm sorry but I think what's going on at these social media companies and with the legacy media is blatant political censorship.