4 ms·
Participants in controversial discourse have long said that the system wants to silence them -- banning such discourse actually makes that true. In the past, t
by twblalock 6y ago
Participants in controversial discourse have long said that the system wants to silence them -- banning such discourse actually makes that true.
In the past, they said they were censored and there was a conspiracy against them, and we could all say, no there isn't, you are active on major online platforms and nobody is suppressing you. Now we can't say that anymore. Not only has the suppression they falsely alleged actually started to happen, companies are even proud to publicly announce that they are part of it.
This is a total backfire because it makes it even harder to change people's minds by confirming what conspiracy theorists suspected all along. Online platforms have fallen into the trap of making one of the main assertions of online far right nonsense actually become true. It is a massive own goal.
- listless 6y agoI wish more people understood this dynamic. I’m married to someone who is caught up in this right-wing cult (it is a cult) and every time a video is removed, it simply convinces her even more that it’s true. If it wasn’t true, why would they hide it? Why do they not want you to see it? BECAUSE IT MUST BE TRUE. This is just the information equivalent of Ruby Ridge - a self-fulfilling conspiracy theory.
- gruez 6y ago>This is a total backfire because it makes it even harder to change people's minds by confirming what conspiracy theorists suspected all along. The question shouldn't be "will doing x help the antagonists", it's "will doing x result in a worse outcome for the antagonists". If they gain from either choice, we shouldn't be paralyzed in our response.
- twblalock 6y agoIf they gain from either choice, we would be better off with the status quo.