4 ms·
Anyone making this point needs to explain why I'm supposed to accept their de jure interpretation of the situation, when de facto, large platforms monopolize di
by jessedhillon 6y ago
Anyone making this point needs to explain why I'm supposed to accept their de jure interpretation of the situation, when de facto, large platforms monopolize distribution. Simply saying "private company" is so lazy, it's not even wrestling with the issue.
- uoaei 6y agoTake it up with GP then, they're the one complaining about "private company".
- zuminator 6y agoBased upon my existing preferences, I already never see these conspiracy theories on YouTube, nor Twitter or Facebook, for that matter. Yet I'm quite familiar with them via a panoply of other sources. So I think you have to do more then just baldly assert that these platforms monopolize information distribution. The fact that there are a lot of platforms with different editorial rules is the exact opposite of a monopoly.
- jessedhillon 6y agoCertainly, a quick search can show you that the overwhelming majority of video views occur on a small number of platforms, and that you are an outlier. If I am someone who has a message to share, far and away the most effective place to share that as a video would be YT, hands down. And that doesn't even begin to address the fact that all of these platforms are converging on the same definitions of safe speech anyhow, so the diversity is nominal.