5 ms·

> To some degree, the media needs to treat its audience like grown ups who are capable of thinking rationally and coming to reasonable conclusions Except a sig

> To some degree, the media needs to treat its audience like grown ups who are capable of thinking rationally and coming to reasonable conclusions Except a significant (and growing) number of people aren't. There's a huge 'anti-science' (or 'anti-elite' if you move in those circles) movement in this country. Without getting into politics, the proof is in the pudding: just the other day, we had the governor of one of our biggest states saying he 'didn't know the coronavirus could be transmitted before people showed symptoms' even though that fact has been readily available to everyone for weeks if not months. When would rather believe politicians than experts, giving those politicians an unchecked way to propagate their message will only kill people.

yters 7y ago
Do you think this sort of censorships helps diminish or build the anti perspectives?
- dguaraglia 7y ago
  It's a mixed bag. Initially there was fear that 'deplatforming' would make these ideas stronger, and the people promoting them 'martyrs' and their 'martyrdom' a 'cause célèbre' that would promote them even further. In other words, that the Streissand effect of deplatforming someone would make them more powerful. Reality seems to contradict that. People who used to enjoy quite a bit of notoriety a couple years ago have essentially disappeared since being deplatformed. Idiots like Milo Yiannopoulos, Gavin McInnes, Alex Jones and a whole bunch of other alt-righter 'personalities' who promoted white supremacy, homophobia, xenophobia, etc. have lost their audiences and are only recognizable by a handful of people who were aware of their positions before they got deplatformed. On the other hand, the people that put the effort to continue following such personalities and ideologies in whatever platforms they managed to stay on, belong to the extreme fringe of the original audience. Because the platforms that still host these people tend to host all kinds of terrible stuff, it's possible that some are being exposed to bad views they didn't espouse before. But let's face it: anyone digging through white supremacist sites to get the latest from Gavin McInnes was a lost cause anyway. In conclusion: deplatforming seems to limit exposure of new people to such perspectives, without requiring government-enforced violations of the First Amendment. There's nothing we can do against people actively looking for such anti-perspectives, because they are already biased against the 'normal' perspective. Conspiracy theorists have existed forever, but only recently they've become mainstream and affect public policy.
  - yters 7y ago
    You are right these particular personalities are no longer well known. But, my question is whether deplatforming in general leads to more or less trust in the platforms, whether mainstream media or new social sites?
    - dguaraglia 7y ago
      Hm, I don't know. The only people I see complaining about 'losing trust' in the platforms is the very people who would be posting harmful content in those platforms. Nobody should place all their eggs in one basket. It is unfortunate that a lot of these platforms have become the only source of revenue for a lot of people. The moment you are that tied to a revenue stream, any changes in policy that restrict the content you produce will become a death blow. People in YouTube are living the 'gig economy' from a different angle.
      - yters 7y ago
        That sounds a bit like a tautology.
  - dguaraglia 7y ago
    One of my favorite aspects of Hacker News is how many people get really miffed when one criticizes the alt-right ideology, but are cowardly enough to not argue the points.

yters 7y ago

Do you think this sort of censorships helps diminish or build the anti perspectives?

dguaraglia 7y ago
It's a mixed bag. Initially there was fear that 'deplatforming' would make these ideas stronger, and the people promoting them 'martyrs' and their 'martyrdom' a 'cause célèbre' that would promote them even further. In other words, that the Streissand effect of deplatforming someone would make them more powerful. Reality seems to contradict that. People who used to enjoy quite a bit of notoriety a couple years ago have essentially disappeared since being deplatformed. Idiots like Milo Yiannopoulos, Gavin McInnes, Alex Jones and a whole bunch of other alt-righter 'personalities' who promoted white supremacy, homophobia, xenophobia, etc. have lost their audiences and are only recognizable by a handful of people who were aware of their positions before they got deplatformed. On the other hand, the people that put the effort to continue following such personalities and ideologies in whatever platforms they managed to stay on, belong to the extreme fringe of the original audience. Because the platforms that still host these people tend to host all kinds of terrible stuff, it's possible that some are being exposed to bad views they didn't espouse before. But let's face it: anyone digging through white supremacist sites to get the latest from Gavin McInnes was a lost cause anyway. In conclusion: deplatforming seems to limit exposure of new people to such perspectives, without requiring government-enforced violations of the First Amendment. There's nothing we can do against people actively looking for such anti-perspectives, because they are already biased against the 'normal' perspective. Conspiracy theorists have existed forever, but only recently they've become mainstream and affect public policy.
- yters 7y ago
  You are right these particular personalities are no longer well known. But, my question is whether deplatforming in general leads to more or less trust in the platforms, whether mainstream media or new social sites?
  - dguaraglia 7y ago
    Hm, I don't know. The only people I see complaining about 'losing trust' in the platforms is the very people who would be posting harmful content in those platforms. Nobody should place all their eggs in one basket. It is unfortunate that a lot of these platforms have become the only source of revenue for a lot of people. The moment you are that tied to a revenue stream, any changes in policy that restrict the content you produce will become a death blow. People in YouTube are living the 'gig economy' from a different angle.
    - yters 7y ago
      That sounds a bit like a tautology.
- dguaraglia 7y ago
  One of my favorite aspects of Hacker News is how many people get really miffed when one criticizes the alt-right ideology, but are cowardly enough to not argue the points.