8 ms·

I much prefer Facebook's relatively laissez faire approach instead of Twitter's politically biased approach where hateful things are allowed as long as they are

I much prefer Facebook's relatively laissez faire approach instead of Twitter's politically biased approach where hateful things are allowed as long as they are from the left side of the political spectrum. Drawing the line on what is hate speech is a hard enough problem already, and companies like Google, Twitter don't even try to be impartial, their execs have clearly taken a side. Add to that the weird times we're living in and how people's fundamental moral ideas have diverted so much in the last 10 years, and you have a perfect disaster. Facebook's approach is less harmful than the alternative right now.

Voloskaya 6y ago
> where hateful things are allowed as long as they are from the left side of the political spectrum Citation needed. It's not because you hear more often in the media about the right being censored that it means that hateful stuff from the left is allowed.
- Darmody 6y ago
  Need a citation? Get on twitter and see how right wingers get banned on heated discussions with left wingers where BOTH are aggressive to each other. The left also mass report stuff they don't like as "hate speech" which automatically results in a ban. Sorry, but the hate speech stuff is just a new way to censor stuff some people don't like and in the end it'll affect us all, no matter if left or right wing.
  - spiderfarmer 6y ago
    I am on Twitter all the time and couldn’t care less about American politics, but the vocal minority of right wingers always think there’s some sort of complot against them. You’re no exception.
    - kukx 6y ago
      Well, objectively the Twitter is biased against conservatives. See a talk on Joe Rogan with Tim Pool and CEO of Twitter. So, the most obvious example is, if you are conservative and assert that there are only two sexes and happen to refer to someone according to your stance - you can get banned for misgendering.
      - elliekelly 6y ago
        That’s because it’s against Twitter’s “Hateful Conduct Policy” which users agree to follow in order to use the site. And it isn’t just “misgendering” someone that will get your account banned, it’s deliberately misgendering someone so as to bully them. Everyone on the internet has accidentally been referred to using the wrong pronouns but innocent mistakes happen when people communicate anonymously. Innocent mistakes won’t get your account banned. Deliberately misgendering someone is also a violation of Facebook’s Community Standards. Do you consider Facebook to be “objectively biased against conservatives” as well?
        spiderfarmer 6y ago
        Some right wingers only want to be nice to people they personally know. The whole “liberally biased” world is trying to “force” them to be nice and they hate it.
  - alpha_squared 6y ago
    A citation is still preferred because the nature of social media is that everyone experiences their own bubble of interactions. As a counter-anecdote, my experience has been that frivolous reporting is far more common coming from far-right political ideologists. Without citation, no one knows who's right/wrong or even how pervasive of a problem it is. It just results in zero discussion and turns into a flame war.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Voloskaya 6y ago
    That's doesn't provide any evidence. Twitter doesn't block tweets for being "agressive", they block tweets for some very specific things like call to violence etc. * Can you show that one side gets censored more often than the other? Not just based on your biased personal timeline. * If yes, can you show that both sides breaks the ToS as often? Both sides are politically very different, and appeal to very different people, it's not hard to imagine that one side may indeed be more violent than the other. So yes, I would like a citation.
    - shripadk 6y ago
      Alright since you asked for citation here is one: https://www.opindia.com/2019/04/popular-twitter-account-trueindology-suspended-again-after-suspended-bureaucrat-threatened-to-use-his-contacts-to-block-it/ https://www.opindia.com/2019/04/popular-twitter-account-true... This is a really popular right wing Twitter account in India which only dealt with exposing false narratives spread by leftist historians with facts. Facts from published books, memoirs of Kings who ruled India, sculptures and ancient artifacts. "True Indology" did not break any rules. Was not violent nor did he threaten anyone. Just exposing false narratives through facts. He was banned with no reason provided. This was not the first time his account was suspended. It was done multiple times. You can read complete details of what he experienced on Twitter here: https://www.mynation.com/views/true-indology-exposes-the-vicious-plan--pqtqwo https://www.mynation.com/views/true-indology-exposes-the-vic... The number of right wing accounts shadow banned and suspended in India by Twitter is staggering. You never hear left wing accounts being suspended. No matter how much hate speech you come across. Heck those left wing accounts that get exposed for hate speech automatically turn their accounts private. That doesn't mean that Twitter doesn't know what is contained within the account right? It can still close down the account for violation of its policies. But it doesn't do that. There is a strong undercurrent against left-leaning biased social media sites like Twitter in India. It will just erupt one day just like Indians have erupted against TikTok. It is only a matter of time. Twitter is doing a big mistake by treating right wingers in India unfairly.
      - commoner 6y ago
        OpIndia is a propaganda website. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIndia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIndia
  - Minor49er 6y ago
    I am citing this comment as an example
- dimgl 6y ago
  > Citation needed. Now that's a LUL
- ApolloFortyNine 6y ago
  There were an incredible number of tweets calling to "Burn it down" or similar (about the fires in Minneapolis after the George Floyd protests). I can link a few tweets, but with millions of twitter messages a day, I can hardly link enough to be statistically relevant if you choose to believe the other way, and I don't have the energy to randomly sample twitter.
  - augustt 6y ago
    Which is hateful against... buildings?
    - milkytron 6y ago
      It's not that it's hateful. It's inciting and encouraging violence, which I'm pretty sure is against the ToS.
      - cryptoz 6y ago
        It's generally understood that violence is something that happens to a person or living entity; buildings being burnt down is very different from a person being attacked. The word violence might be used for both, but really, it is meant in the modern day to refer to people. Violence isn't about property that can be rebuilt with mere money. It is about hurting people.
        aifer4 6y ago
        The definition of violence: "behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something." Unless we're using words in the humpty dumpty sense of "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
        milkytron 6y ago
        So I looked up their policy, and you seem to be correct there. Twitter defines violence as towards other individuals or groups. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules However, if users are encouraging or telling others to break the law, that is also against Twitters policies. > You may not use our service for any unlawful purpose or in furtherance of illegal activities. Encouraging or inciting others to break the law is illegal. Although it's on the illegal goods page, I think this could still be against their policy. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/regulated-goods-services https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/regulated-goo...
- kukx 6y ago
  What about the call to dox the Covington kids by a verified account. Is there anything comparable to it on the right side? I do not think so. The rules for thee, but not for me. https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1086927762634399744?lang=en https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1086927762634399744?...
  - Voloskaya 6y ago
    You mean like the numerous calls from many top GOP lawmakers to dox the Ukraine scandal whistleblower? Probably dozens of tweets just from the president and not one was censored.
- TheRealSteel 6y ago
  I'm about as left wing as you can get, but Twitter is incredibly biased. August Ames chose not to have sex with men who have sex with men. Because of this decision to do what she wants with her own body, she was harassed by people telling her to commit suicide for it. She DID kill herself, and the people that told her to were not even banned. https://www.spartareport.com/2017/12/leftists-bullied-august-ames/ https://www.spartareport.com/2017/12/leftists-bullied-august...
- mtgp1000 6y ago
  If these claims of censorship were true, where would you expect to find a citation? If I linked you threads of people like Tariq Nashad calling for racial violence against whites, my post would likely be flagged and I'd be banned for posting flamebait. I don't think there's an explicit conspiracy but the forces are aligned such that they suppress content and naturally suppress criticism of suppression, and that creates an internet-wide false consensus.
r00fus 6y ago
I feel exactly the opposite of you. Facebook is a right-wing echo chamber, and I've left along with all of my family (moving outwards to more extended family).
JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
Giving examples of the type of content that's permitted from the left, but not the right, could be helpful to your argument. As someone who leans left, it's hard to see the bias. One other piece of contextual relevance is tweets from POTUS stay up due to their newsworthiness. If a Democratic president tweeted identical statements to Trump, I would expect identical treatment: no removal, but tagged with phrases like "Get the facts" (e.g., on coronavirus) or tweets hidden for glorying violence.
- t-writescode 6y ago
  The president is a huge exception to the rule. 3 and a half years ago, I think (citation needed) it was found that Twitter was obligated to keep Trump tweets up because he is president and those are now official record. There was that whole big to do wat back then about him deleting one of his tweets and whether that was allowed or not.
  - caymanjim 6y ago
    Allowed by whom? Twitter can delete anything of Trump's, and can delete his account if they want to.
    - t-writescode 6y ago
      Things get complicated with the president. This whole thing happened: https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/sep/27/what-does-law-say-about-donald-trumps-deleted-twee/ https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/sep/27/what-does-law...
      - caymanjim 6y ago
        That's entirely about the government's responsibility to retain records. Twitter has zero obligation.
- onetimeusename 6y ago
  Here is a demonstrably false thing that Twitter doesn't censor: https://twitter.com/search?q=black%20egyptians&src=typed_query https://twitter.com/search?q=black%20egyptians&src=typed_que... I have not seen them censor the Black Egyptian or Black Moor hypotheses in spite of being associated with Black Supremacy and being "demonstrably false" which is a category of things the #StopHateForProfit campaigns are targeting. In fairness I don't know what content ends up being blocked, maybe there is a way to see it. But I have seen particular efforts, such as the doctored video Donald Trump recently posted, to tag content as misleading but I have not seen this for the above. As you pointed out, they did the same for coronavirus. Perhaps some of this debate is just about the 'reach' of content but afaict the Black Egyptian disinformation is prevalent. I might be wrong, I don't know all the ins and outs of Twitter blocking.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

Voloskaya 6y ago

> where hateful things are allowed as long as they are from the left side of the political spectrum Citation needed. It's not because you hear more often in the media about the right being censored that it means that hateful stuff from the left is allowed.

Darmody 6y ago
Need a citation? Get on twitter and see how right wingers get banned on heated discussions with left wingers where BOTH are aggressive to each other. The left also mass report stuff they don't like as "hate speech" which automatically results in a ban. Sorry, but the hate speech stuff is just a new way to censor stuff some people don't like and in the end it'll affect us all, no matter if left or right wing.
- spiderfarmer 6y ago
  I am on Twitter all the time and couldn’t care less about American politics, but the vocal minority of right wingers always think there’s some sort of complot against them. You’re no exception.
  - kukx 6y ago
    Well, objectively the Twitter is biased against conservatives. See a talk on Joe Rogan with Tim Pool and CEO of Twitter. So, the most obvious example is, if you are conservative and assert that there are only two sexes and happen to refer to someone according to your stance - you can get banned for misgendering.
    - elliekelly 6y ago
      That’s because it’s against Twitter’s “Hateful Conduct Policy” which users agree to follow in order to use the site. And it isn’t just “misgendering” someone that will get your account banned, it’s deliberately misgendering someone so as to bully them. Everyone on the internet has accidentally been referred to using the wrong pronouns but innocent mistakes happen when people communicate anonymously. Innocent mistakes won’t get your account banned. Deliberately misgendering someone is also a violation of Facebook’s Community Standards. Do you consider Facebook to be “objectively biased against conservatives” as well?
      - spiderfarmer 6y ago
        Some right wingers only want to be nice to people they personally know. The whole “liberally biased” world is trying to “force” them to be nice and they hate it.
- alpha_squared 6y ago
  A citation is still preferred because the nature of social media is that everyone experiences their own bubble of interactions. As a counter-anecdote, my experience has been that frivolous reporting is far more common coming from far-right political ideologists. Without citation, no one knows who's right/wrong or even how pervasive of a problem it is. It just results in zero discussion and turns into a flame war.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Voloskaya 6y ago
  That's doesn't provide any evidence. Twitter doesn't block tweets for being "agressive", they block tweets for some very specific things like call to violence etc. * Can you show that one side gets censored more often than the other? Not just based on your biased personal timeline. * If yes, can you show that both sides breaks the ToS as often? Both sides are politically very different, and appeal to very different people, it's not hard to imagine that one side may indeed be more violent than the other. So yes, I would like a citation.
  - shripadk 6y ago
    Alright since you asked for citation here is one: https://www.opindia.com/2019/04/popular-twitter-account-trueindology-suspended-again-after-suspended-bureaucrat-threatened-to-use-his-contacts-to-block-it/ https://www.opindia.com/2019/04/popular-twitter-account-true... This is a really popular right wing Twitter account in India which only dealt with exposing false narratives spread by leftist historians with facts. Facts from published books, memoirs of Kings who ruled India, sculptures and ancient artifacts. "True Indology" did not break any rules. Was not violent nor did he threaten anyone. Just exposing false narratives through facts. He was banned with no reason provided. This was not the first time his account was suspended. It was done multiple times. You can read complete details of what he experienced on Twitter here: https://www.mynation.com/views/true-indology-exposes-the-vicious-plan--pqtqwo https://www.mynation.com/views/true-indology-exposes-the-vic... The number of right wing accounts shadow banned and suspended in India by Twitter is staggering. You never hear left wing accounts being suspended. No matter how much hate speech you come across. Heck those left wing accounts that get exposed for hate speech automatically turn their accounts private. That doesn't mean that Twitter doesn't know what is contained within the account right? It can still close down the account for violation of its policies. But it doesn't do that. There is a strong undercurrent against left-leaning biased social media sites like Twitter in India. It will just erupt one day just like Indians have erupted against TikTok. It is only a matter of time. Twitter is doing a big mistake by treating right wingers in India unfairly.
    - commoner 6y ago
      OpIndia is a propaganda website. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIndia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIndia
- Minor49er 6y ago
  I am citing this comment as an example
dimgl 6y ago
> Citation needed. Now that's a LUL
ApolloFortyNine 6y ago
There were an incredible number of tweets calling to "Burn it down" or similar (about the fires in Minneapolis after the George Floyd protests). I can link a few tweets, but with millions of twitter messages a day, I can hardly link enough to be statistically relevant if you choose to believe the other way, and I don't have the energy to randomly sample twitter.
- augustt 6y ago
  Which is hateful against... buildings?
  - milkytron 6y ago
    It's not that it's hateful. It's inciting and encouraging violence, which I'm pretty sure is against the ToS.
    - cryptoz 6y ago
      It's generally understood that violence is something that happens to a person or living entity; buildings being burnt down is very different from a person being attacked. The word violence might be used for both, but really, it is meant in the modern day to refer to people. Violence isn't about property that can be rebuilt with mere money. It is about hurting people.
      - aifer4 6y ago
        The definition of violence: "behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something." Unless we're using words in the humpty dumpty sense of "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
      - milkytron 6y ago
        So I looked up their policy, and you seem to be correct there. Twitter defines violence as towards other individuals or groups. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules However, if users are encouraging or telling others to break the law, that is also against Twitters policies. > You may not use our service for any unlawful purpose or in furtherance of illegal activities. Encouraging or inciting others to break the law is illegal. Although it's on the illegal goods page, I think this could still be against their policy. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/regulated-goods-services https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/regulated-goo...
kukx 6y ago
What about the call to dox the Covington kids by a verified account. Is there anything comparable to it on the right side? I do not think so. The rules for thee, but not for me. https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1086927762634399744?lang=en https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1086927762634399744?...
- Voloskaya 6y ago
  You mean like the numerous calls from many top GOP lawmakers to dox the Ukraine scandal whistleblower? Probably dozens of tweets just from the president and not one was censored.
TheRealSteel 6y ago
I'm about as left wing as you can get, but Twitter is incredibly biased. August Ames chose not to have sex with men who have sex with men. Because of this decision to do what she wants with her own body, she was harassed by people telling her to commit suicide for it. She DID kill herself, and the people that told her to were not even banned. https://www.spartareport.com/2017/12/leftists-bullied-august-ames/ https://www.spartareport.com/2017/12/leftists-bullied-august...
mtgp1000 6y ago
If these claims of censorship were true, where would you expect to find a citation? If I linked you threads of people like Tariq Nashad calling for racial violence against whites, my post would likely be flagged and I'd be banned for posting flamebait. I don't think there's an explicit conspiracy but the forces are aligned such that they suppress content and naturally suppress criticism of suppression, and that creates an internet-wide false consensus.

r00fus 6y ago

I feel exactly the opposite of you. Facebook is a right-wing echo chamber, and I've left along with all of my family (moving outwards to more extended family).

JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago

Giving examples of the type of content that's permitted from the left, but not the right, could be helpful to your argument. As someone who leans left, it's hard to see the bias. One other piece of contextual relevance is tweets from POTUS stay up due to their newsworthiness. If a Democratic president tweeted identical statements to Trump, I would expect identical treatment: no removal, but tagged with phrases like "Get the facts" (e.g., on coronavirus) or tweets hidden for glorying violence.

t-writescode 6y ago
The president is a huge exception to the rule. 3 and a half years ago, I think (citation needed) it was found that Twitter was obligated to keep Trump tweets up because he is president and those are now official record. There was that whole big to do wat back then about him deleting one of his tweets and whether that was allowed or not.
- caymanjim 6y ago
  Allowed by whom? Twitter can delete anything of Trump's, and can delete his account if they want to.
  - t-writescode 6y ago
    Things get complicated with the president. This whole thing happened: https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/sep/27/what-does-law-say-about-donald-trumps-deleted-twee/ https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/sep/27/what-does-law...
    - caymanjim 6y ago
      That's entirely about the government's responsibility to retain records. Twitter has zero obligation.
onetimeusename 6y ago
Here is a demonstrably false thing that Twitter doesn't censor: https://twitter.com/search?q=black%20egyptians&src=typed_query https://twitter.com/search?q=black%20egyptians&src=typed_que... I have not seen them censor the Black Egyptian or Black Moor hypotheses in spite of being associated with Black Supremacy and being "demonstrably false" which is a category of things the #StopHateForProfit campaigns are targeting. In fairness I don't know what content ends up being blocked, maybe there is a way to see it. But I have seen particular efforts, such as the doctored video Donald Trump recently posted, to tag content as misleading but I have not seen this for the above. As you pointed out, they did the same for coronavirus. Perhaps some of this debate is just about the 'reach' of content but afaict the Black Egyptian disinformation is prevalent. I might be wrong, I don't know all the ins and outs of Twitter blocking.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]