5 ms·

But this isn't the same as ISIS recruiting off of Twitter where the FBI/CIA/NSA monitors that discourse and contacts the respective platforms. This is a company

But this isn't the same as ISIS recruiting off of Twitter where the FBI/CIA/NSA monitors that discourse and contacts the respective platforms. This is a company deciding what should and shouldn't be censored. There's a difference between protected speech and yelling "FIRE!" in a movie theater. But with the way things are moving, more and more speech is being classified as "hate speech." The line between offensive speech and violent words is getting more murky. I think there needs to be clear standards and clear enforcement.

lostcolony 6y ago
'The line between offensive speech and violent words is getting more murky.' So do you think Amazon is falling on the wrong side of it here? Because even if it's more murky, if they're waiting until it's -very clearly violent-, egregiously so, with real physical criminal acts occurring because of it, I'm pretty sure no matter how murky the line is, they're well on the side of "violent words", not "offensive speech". Your concern only applies if they're trying to draw the line in an area that is murky. I'd contend this is not.
leeoniya 6y ago
> This is a company deciding what should and shouldn't be censored. are you saying that platforms cannot choose what to moderate because of a right to free speech? that's nonsense. you want free speech, go outside with a bullhorn, no one will arrest you - that's all that means.
- DJPocari 6y ago
  Even if it is okay for Facebook and Twitter to impose strict moderation policies, is it okay for AWS, Verizon, or GoDaddy? I just think it's a slippery slope, and we desperately need to cement our feet in the ground and draw a line somewhere. Also, when an overwhelming majority of public discourse takes place online (thanks 2020), the people choosing who does and does not get access to the centralized systems have a CRAZY amount of power. Yelling in a public square isn't how ideas spread anymore.
  - santoshalper 6y ago
    Is it Ok to force owners of a private company to host content they find objectionable? Gay porn on the Hobby Lobby forums? AWS is a private business, they don't have to host anything they don't want to. Forcing them to host parler would be an egregious violation of their right to choose who they associate with. I think a way more interest question is this - what about modern US conservatism makes violence so attractive to it? You cannot have a conservative forum that will not rapidly devolve into violent threats. Even /r/conservative, the more mainstream and mature conservative subreddit is absolutely full of people threatening revolution, backs against the wall, etc. The reality is that we as a society are getting numb to this and are actually being far too tolerant.
    - throwaway201103 6y ago
      You see the same unhinged types on left leaning platforms. Online forums attract the fringe loudmouths. Parler is not representative of modern US conservatism. I call myself conservative and I've never in my life visited the site. https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most_of_what_you_read_on_the_internet_is_written/ https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most... Edit: to be clear, in context, I am saying that these nutjob posters on Parler are not representative. I understand that mainstream conservatives may also have a presence there.
    - woofcat 6y ago
      My problem sometimes with this line of reasoning is that some rights are more important than others, we've already decided that as a fact. For instance "Forcing them to host parler would be an egregious violation of their right to choose who they associate with." Is true, but we force companies not to discriminate based on Age, Sex, Religion, etc. So your right of who you can associate with isn't iron clad. We could just as easily add "Freedom of Expression" to the list of things you can not discriminate against, and suddenly the argument holds no water. I'm not an American, however I sometimes enjoy the irony of America where one side of the political spectrum will be angry that a bakery is forced to bake a cake for a gay couple, but think it's against the customers rights for AWS to not host content they don't agree with. Whilst the other thinks the baker should be forced to bake a cake against their will, and AWS is free to drop any business they feel like.
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  "If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." -Noam Chomsky
  - leeoniya 6y ago
    i wonder if his views would be the same if tens of thousands of people were chanting "hang chomsky" because they were convinced by "free speech" that he was a pedophile, through cheap and easy dissemination of photoshopped images and ai-generated voice "recordings". it's difficult to map pre-internet ideals to 2021.
    - cjohnson318 6y ago
      Also, pre-deepfake ideals.
  - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
    Chomsky is talking about free speech in the context of academic debate. Death threats and similar do not fit in any shape or form into "free speech".
    - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
      Downvoted for educating people on free speech - oh the irony!
drak0n1c 6y ago
Regarding the "FIRE!" analogy - there are journalists such as Glenn Greenwald arguing that media and politicians fearmongering the specter of right wing terrorism are the becoming the ones yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater, and the mass deplatforming of regular conservative groups and proposed Patriot Act 2.0 measures that will ensue is the movie theater suffering disproportionate and unnecessary harm as a result.
- amanaplanacanal 6y ago
  Is there actually mass deplatforming of regular conservative groups? Where is this happening?
  - drak0n1c 6y ago
    On Facebook, “WalkAway” a community that was devoted to compiling hundreds of thousands of ex-Democrat video and text testimonials was banned. It was not about Q and didn’t advocate breaking into government buildings. It was the most wholesome right wing space I’ve ever seen on the internet. People sharing their experiences being alienated by either how they saw media manipulate a story they knew about or by how divisive partisanship and cancel culture personally affected them. Welcoming each other in the comments regardless of their sexual orientation or race. It would have been a useful place to learn from but now it’s gone.

lostcolony 6y ago

'The line between offensive speech and violent words is getting more murky.' So do you think Amazon is falling on the wrong side of it here? Because even if it's more murky, if they're waiting until it's -very clearly violent-, egregiously so, with real physical criminal acts occurring because of it, I'm pretty sure no matter how murky the line is, they're well on the side of "violent words", not "offensive speech". Your concern only applies if they're trying to draw the line in an area that is murky. I'd contend this is not.

leeoniya 6y ago

> This is a company deciding what should and shouldn't be censored. are you saying that platforms cannot choose what to moderate because of a right to free speech? that's nonsense. you want free speech, go outside with a bullhorn, no one will arrest you - that's all that means.

DJPocari 6y ago
Even if it is okay for Facebook and Twitter to impose strict moderation policies, is it okay for AWS, Verizon, or GoDaddy? I just think it's a slippery slope, and we desperately need to cement our feet in the ground and draw a line somewhere. Also, when an overwhelming majority of public discourse takes place online (thanks 2020), the people choosing who does and does not get access to the centralized systems have a CRAZY amount of power. Yelling in a public square isn't how ideas spread anymore.
- santoshalper 6y ago
  Is it Ok to force owners of a private company to host content they find objectionable? Gay porn on the Hobby Lobby forums? AWS is a private business, they don't have to host anything they don't want to. Forcing them to host parler would be an egregious violation of their right to choose who they associate with. I think a way more interest question is this - what about modern US conservatism makes violence so attractive to it? You cannot have a conservative forum that will not rapidly devolve into violent threats. Even /r/conservative, the more mainstream and mature conservative subreddit is absolutely full of people threatening revolution, backs against the wall, etc. The reality is that we as a society are getting numb to this and are actually being far too tolerant.
  - throwaway201103 6y ago
    You see the same unhinged types on left leaning platforms. Online forums attract the fringe loudmouths. Parler is not representative of modern US conservatism. I call myself conservative and I've never in my life visited the site. https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most_of_what_you_read_on_the_internet_is_written/ https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most... Edit: to be clear, in context, I am saying that these nutjob posters on Parler are not representative. I understand that mainstream conservatives may also have a presence there.
  - woofcat 6y ago
    My problem sometimes with this line of reasoning is that some rights are more important than others, we've already decided that as a fact. For instance "Forcing them to host parler would be an egregious violation of their right to choose who they associate with." Is true, but we force companies not to discriminate based on Age, Sex, Religion, etc. So your right of who you can associate with isn't iron clad. We could just as easily add "Freedom of Expression" to the list of things you can not discriminate against, and suddenly the argument holds no water. I'm not an American, however I sometimes enjoy the irony of America where one side of the political spectrum will be angry that a bakery is forced to bake a cake for a gay couple, but think it's against the customers rights for AWS to not host content they don't agree with. Whilst the other thinks the baker should be forced to bake a cake against their will, and AWS is free to drop any business they feel like.
throwaway201103 6y ago
"If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." -Noam Chomsky
- leeoniya 6y ago
  i wonder if his views would be the same if tens of thousands of people were chanting "hang chomsky" because they were convinced by "free speech" that he was a pedophile, through cheap and easy dissemination of photoshopped images and ai-generated voice "recordings". it's difficult to map pre-internet ideals to 2021.
  - cjohnson318 6y ago
    Also, pre-deepfake ideals.
- eeZah7Ux 6y ago
  Chomsky is talking about free speech in the context of academic debate. Death threats and similar do not fit in any shape or form into "free speech".
  - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
    Downvoted for educating people on free speech - oh the irony!

drak0n1c 6y ago

Regarding the "FIRE!" analogy - there are journalists such as Glenn Greenwald arguing that media and politicians fearmongering the specter of right wing terrorism are the becoming the ones yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater, and the mass deplatforming of regular conservative groups and proposed Patriot Act 2.0 measures that will ensue is the movie theater suffering disproportionate and unnecessary harm as a result.

amanaplanacanal 6y ago
Is there actually mass deplatforming of regular conservative groups? Where is this happening?
- drak0n1c 6y ago
  On Facebook, “WalkAway” a community that was devoted to compiling hundreds of thousands of ex-Democrat video and text testimonials was banned. It was not about Q and didn’t advocate breaking into government buildings. It was the most wholesome right wing space I’ve ever seen on the internet. People sharing their experiences being alienated by either how they saw media manipulate a story they knew about or by how divisive partisanship and cancel culture personally affected them. Welcoming each other in the comments regardless of their sexual orientation or race. It would have been a useful place to learn from but now it’s gone.