5 ms·

I still think there's a big difference between giving a platform to the people who don't have a voice (Twitter revolutions), vs giving a platform to world leade

I still think there's a big difference between giving a platform to the people who don't have a voice (Twitter revolutions), vs giving a platform to world leaders and people in power trying to use the platform to disseminate their propaganda. Also, realistically no one's gonna care too much if you ban one of those millions of people without a voice, but good luck trying to censor the president.

smnrchrds 6y ago
> I still think there's a big difference between giving a platform to the people who don't have a voice (Twitter revolutions), vs giving a platform to world leaders and people in power trying to use the platform to disseminate their propaganda. I don't think Twitter revolutions were free of propaganda. I am sure all the superpowers and regional powers were fanning the flames of discontent and trying to steer the results in their favourite direction. The excuse many countries gave for blocking Twitter was that it was a foreign propaganda tool. I am not saying the entire thing was foreign agents and propaganda. I am saying that there was some of that then as it is now. We have just learned to see it, because now the propaganda is directed at us and we have a clearer view.
- ehsankia 6y ago
  Oh I absolutely agree, there always has and will be disguised propaganda, my second point still holds that pure lies and provable misinformation such as "Trump won the election" can get deleted when coming from an average user, but not when coming from someone in power. Entire networks of bots spreading misinformation get removed every once in a while, but you won't see the same happening with world leaders purposefully spreading lies.
newen 6y ago
Nothing stops "people who don't have a voice" from posting misinformation, lying, etc to bring about the revolution faster. Also, almost all of the people who have large followings in Twitter have large followings in real life. That is, they are people in power trying the use the platform to disseminate their propaganda. In the case of the Twitter revolutions, they are revolutions in far away countries that align with American geopolitical interests, so an American would be inclined to agree with it (due to media, society, their own material interests) and consequently rationalize it.
listless 6y ago
“Propaganda is communication that is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is presented.” Social Media literally turns every important, nuanced discussion into propaganda. Until we all realize that and decide to collectively reject it at an ideological level, it’s gonna be a rough road.

smnrchrds 6y ago

> I still think there's a big difference between giving a platform to the people who don't have a voice (Twitter revolutions), vs giving a platform to world leaders and people in power trying to use the platform to disseminate their propaganda. I don't think Twitter revolutions were free of propaganda. I am sure all the superpowers and regional powers were fanning the flames of discontent and trying to steer the results in their favourite direction. The excuse many countries gave for blocking Twitter was that it was a foreign propaganda tool. I am not saying the entire thing was foreign agents and propaganda. I am saying that there was some of that then as it is now. We have just learned to see it, because now the propaganda is directed at us and we have a clearer view.

ehsankia 6y ago
Oh I absolutely agree, there always has and will be disguised propaganda, my second point still holds that pure lies and provable misinformation such as "Trump won the election" can get deleted when coming from an average user, but not when coming from someone in power. Entire networks of bots spreading misinformation get removed every once in a while, but you won't see the same happening with world leaders purposefully spreading lies.

newen 6y ago

Nothing stops "people who don't have a voice" from posting misinformation, lying, etc to bring about the revolution faster. Also, almost all of the people who have large followings in Twitter have large followings in real life. That is, they are people in power trying the use the platform to disseminate their propaganda. In the case of the Twitter revolutions, they are revolutions in far away countries that align with American geopolitical interests, so an American would be inclined to agree with it (due to media, society, their own material interests) and consequently rationalize it.

listless 6y ago

“Propaganda is communication that is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is presented.” Social Media literally turns every important, nuanced discussion into propaganda. Until we all realize that and decide to collectively reject it at an ideological level, it’s gonna be a rough road.