4 ms·

If that was about reporting what happened at the Capitol I don't think it should've been removed. But if people was asking in Twitter for Pence to be hanged, th

If that was about reporting what happened at the Capitol I don't think it should've been removed. But if people was asking in Twitter for Pence to be hanged, then yes. We shouldn't treat the same way reporting violence than violence itself.

gkoberger 6y ago
I don't think I agree. Me tweeting "it's bad to say 'hang mike pence'" is still letting the concept of Mike Pence being hanged propagate. I mean, we're talking about it right now on Hacker News, even! Toxic ideas are like a virus, and even well-meaning opposition can serve as a host, allowing them to spread rapidly rather than die out.
- nevi-me 6y ago
  True. Not a great example, but "don't think of an elephant" is a good example of this effect, where someone who otherwise wasn't thinking of elephants, starts thinking of one. The context of the discussion becomes less relevant if only the phrase trends. The seed gets sown in the mind.
- Darmody 6y ago
  Then what do you suggest? To we censor the news altogether? They report facts and usually they do it on a very editorialized way. Hiding information from the population is what authoritarian states do.
  - gkoberger 6y ago
    Well, the government doesn't have any say in Twitter trends, so it's hard to argue this is what an "authoritarian state" does. It's a private company that would prefer its product isn't used in the murder of a politician. I don't have an answer, and I don't think there is one. I do, however, wish there was more scrutiny of the people spreading the message (aka the president of the united states) than companies trying to navigate this really tough balance.
    - Darmody 6y ago
      I don't think it's hard to argue that. When countries like China censor, what they do is make companies delete anything they don't like. Now it is the company directly who decides to censor which in my opinion is worse. Why worse? Because you don't get to elect those who run the company. In a democracy you have the chance to change the government but that can't be done with a private company. Now, when you have a few companies that control most of the communication channels and they can censor indiscriminately anyone who they don't like, you're absolutely doomed.
      - gkoberger 6y ago
        So you'd rather the current government make this decision? You know, the government run by a president who directly incited all this "hang mike pence" stuff, right from Twitter itself? While the rioting was happening, the president tweeted "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!" And his lawyer tweeted "[Pence] will face execution by firing squad. He is a coward & will sing like a bird & confess ALL." I'm not sure if those are the people we want making these decisions. Like I said, I don't like any of this. I want to live in a world where we don't have to decide between the government and large companies, neither of which I particularly like. But alas, here we are... and currently, Twitter is the one on the side of "not lynching the VP", so I guess I'm on their side.
        Darmody 6y ago
        You're completely missing my point. Of course anyone with more than 2 neurons is on the side of "not lynching the VP". My point was that a company like Twitter should not censor people talking about the fact that rioters chanted "hang mike pence".
        gkoberger 6y ago
        I'm not missing it, I'm disagreeing. You can't say a company removing content is something China would do. It's the opposite. In an authoritarian regime, Twitter would be forced to be in lock step with the government, and the opposite is happening now. Think of it as checks and balances.

gkoberger 6y ago

I don't think I agree. Me tweeting "it's bad to say 'hang mike pence'" is still letting the concept of Mike Pence being hanged propagate. I mean, we're talking about it right now on Hacker News, even! Toxic ideas are like a virus, and even well-meaning opposition can serve as a host, allowing them to spread rapidly rather than die out.

nevi-me 6y ago
True. Not a great example, but "don't think of an elephant" is a good example of this effect, where someone who otherwise wasn't thinking of elephants, starts thinking of one. The context of the discussion becomes less relevant if only the phrase trends. The seed gets sown in the mind.
Darmody 6y ago
Then what do you suggest? To we censor the news altogether? They report facts and usually they do it on a very editorialized way. Hiding information from the population is what authoritarian states do.
- gkoberger 6y ago
  Well, the government doesn't have any say in Twitter trends, so it's hard to argue this is what an "authoritarian state" does. It's a private company that would prefer its product isn't used in the murder of a politician. I don't have an answer, and I don't think there is one. I do, however, wish there was more scrutiny of the people spreading the message (aka the president of the united states) than companies trying to navigate this really tough balance.
  - Darmody 6y ago
    I don't think it's hard to argue that. When countries like China censor, what they do is make companies delete anything they don't like. Now it is the company directly who decides to censor which in my opinion is worse. Why worse? Because you don't get to elect those who run the company. In a democracy you have the chance to change the government but that can't be done with a private company. Now, when you have a few companies that control most of the communication channels and they can censor indiscriminately anyone who they don't like, you're absolutely doomed.
    - gkoberger 6y ago
      So you'd rather the current government make this decision? You know, the government run by a president who directly incited all this "hang mike pence" stuff, right from Twitter itself? While the rioting was happening, the president tweeted "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!" And his lawyer tweeted "[Pence] will face execution by firing squad. He is a coward & will sing like a bird & confess ALL." I'm not sure if those are the people we want making these decisions. Like I said, I don't like any of this. I want to live in a world where we don't have to decide between the government and large companies, neither of which I particularly like. But alas, here we are... and currently, Twitter is the one on the side of "not lynching the VP", so I guess I'm on their side.
      - Darmody 6y ago
        You're completely missing my point. Of course anyone with more than 2 neurons is on the side of "not lynching the VP". My point was that a company like Twitter should not censor people talking about the fact that rioters chanted "hang mike pence".
        gkoberger 6y ago
        I'm not missing it, I'm disagreeing. You can't say a company removing content is something China would do. It's the opposite. In an authoritarian regime, Twitter would be forced to be in lock step with the government, and the opposite is happening now. Think of it as checks and balances.