4 ms·

I don’t think the goal of banning these folks is to change the banned person’s mind. It’s to slow down the spread of the banned person’s rhetoric. To your sugge

I don’t think the goal of banning these folks is to change the banned person’s mind. It’s to slow down the spread of the banned person’s rhetoric. To your suggestion that folks who witness the ban take place suspecting “there’s something afoot”, while that could be right, I’d bet that’s a much smaller number than the number of folks who would’ve otherwise seen the rhetoric and came around to agreeing with it, if not reinforcing their own.

manfredo 6y ago
I agree that the goal is to curb the spread of such views, not so much to change the minds of those who already harbor them. But I still think it's having the opposite effect. The streisand effect is real and likely playing out here. Thanks to this ban, a lot of people are wondering if the claims of electoral fraud were actually disproven or if evidence of legitimate fraud was suppressed. The bans make it very easy to appeal to uncertainty: you can't find evidence of fraud not because fraud didn't happen but because the evidence of fraud was purged.
- pindab0ter 6y ago
  How does the ‘purging’ of a social media platform equate to purging evidence of fraud? If there is evidence of fraud this may be shared but would not solely exist on a social media platform. Unless fraudeurs would openly discuss these matters, of course.
  - manfredo 6y ago
    Dropping Parler is part of a broader trend of eliminating content claiming electoral fraud: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/07/youtube-says-it-will-suspend-channels-claiming-widespread-voter-fraud.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/07/youtube-says-it-will-suspend...
igetspam 6y ago
I don't think that's the goal. I think the goal for those companies is to not lose business over this. This is the free market at its best. Market pressure has made the math pretty simple: if N customers won't do business with my company because we do business with Abhorrent Co and the potential revenue loss from losing those N companies is greater than the revenue I generate from Abhorrent Co, then drop Abhorrent Co. If any of those companies felt the ethical/moral value of Parler was more valuable than the lost revenue, they wouldn't drop them. Obviously that's not the case. The moral here is pretty simple: don't be a Nazi.
- loudtieblahblah 6y ago
  Not everyone right of Biden is a nazi.
  - igetspam 6y ago
    And not everyone "right of Biden" is being deplatformed, unless you think everyone right of center is on Parler. Parler is a cesspool of hate groups and conspiracy theories, many of them Nazi or Nazi adjacent.
    - loudtieblahblah 6y ago
      Not everyone you disagree with is a nazi.
      - phoobahr 6y ago
        This is not a helpful take when there are actual nazi's - right over there - talking about (and doing) nazi shit. And the thing about shit is it does splash damage. When cesspools like twitter and facebook finally give up their add revenue from the flies circling said shit and the turds have to go live in a latrine maybe _just_maybe_ someone should be asking "Are we the baddies?". Furthermore when someone does try to start cleaning up this shit, and it's always a terrible nasty thankless job, and you're inconvenienced because you're standing too close maybe the question shouldn't be "what about my rights?" But "why the hell am I here in the first place?" Shit.
        loudtieblahblah 6y ago
        there are actual nazis, muslim extremists, antifa types, and all sorts encouraging violence on Twitter and facebook right now. right now you can go and find propaganda pages from the world's most repressive and violent regimes, like Saudi Arabia, for example. When Uganda banned Twitter/Facebook for election interference, all of a sudden "free speech" rights matter to these platforms and they find it unjust. you could argue the majority of the protest at DC was organized on major platforms over Parler. So why are we de-platforming major players through our ISPs? Why isn't verizon or comcast blocking Facebook or Twitter. Go get your own series of tubes. Parler, like Twitter, has a team of people who work to remove posts in violation of the rules. A political situation and some token examples are being exploited to take out a competitor. And it just so happens that the Dems are going to chair all the Congressional committees that over see Silicon Valley, you're going to have a Dem house, senate and POTUS. This right here is being taken advantage of to take an an entire wing of a debate and to tilt poltical power. And the populace is cheering it on. Just like they cheered on the Iraq War and the Patriot Act. It's a common bi-partisan tactic to blame the whole for the actions of the fringe and use that as a wedge. It's like how my Trumper father rags on PETA when he wants to complain about environmentalism. This is the same crap. Except at a far larger level, far more cynical an far more corrupt. We're losing our ability for free speech, people -LEFTISTS of all people - are celebrating a handful of tech monopolies, acting in unison as some kind of cabal, led by a singular political party in this country - this is the merging of capital and state that you see in fascist societies, all the while shouting the loudest about anti-fascism. Just like the Koch brothers shouting about liberty and freedom, things tend to not mean what people claim they mean. And you're all a bunch of suckers for buying this horsepucky, hook, line and sinker. I'm a Bernie (except on this issue), AOC, Nader loving social democrat. But "my side" is selling it's proverbial sole to the devil b/c "winning" means more than any foundational values that should apply to us all. We're no longer agreeing on a even playing field. Democracy is up for grabs by both sides if it means one of them stands a chance at winning. And both sides only happen to see this destructive behavior in the other and never in the mirror.
salawat 6y ago
I can honestly say that with what little time I have, and limited access to info, I can't really convincingly dispel the feeling that there was fraud from people. I've seen State responses, I've talked to people. I follow up on both sides takes on things. These last few days though have started to convince me that there is a huge problem, way bigger even than election fraud, and it's the sheer rapidity that agenda's can get rolled out by platforms, or handily shutdown. People recognize that. It encourages them to then spread info the old fashion way, and well... You might have a pandemic going on which helps isolating people from each other, but the lines are still open. I think GP is definitely right. This is half tge reason why I felt the only thing to do that would make sense was a full public accounting of every facet of every suspected voting process. Audits, machines, software, configurations, datasets, all of it. There is no way you hold it tight to your chest and come out of it with everyone unified to move forward, and no offence, but I don't trust anyone on Earth with the technology for successful mass management of unruly populations. A pity that quality doesn't appear more universal as evidenced by current events.
panarky 6y ago
Censoring ISIS beheading and recruiting videos was effective. Any resentment or suspicion of censorship was far more than offset by the reduction in reach. Suppressing incitement to violence along with the recruitment, training and organization of violent actors is essential.
- thu2111 6y ago
  You don't actually know that. Clearly, ISIS didn't need YouTube to spread. It conquered large parts of Syria and was defeated via military means. Plenty of ISIS sympathisers turned up in the west later, but I don't recall reading about many that were radicalised by watching YouTube. Normally they'd either been to Syria, or it was local mosques.

manfredo 6y ago

I agree that the goal is to curb the spread of such views, not so much to change the minds of those who already harbor them. But I still think it's having the opposite effect. The streisand effect is real and likely playing out here. Thanks to this ban, a lot of people are wondering if the claims of electoral fraud were actually disproven or if evidence of legitimate fraud was suppressed. The bans make it very easy to appeal to uncertainty: you can't find evidence of fraud not because fraud didn't happen but because the evidence of fraud was purged.

pindab0ter 6y ago
How does the ‘purging’ of a social media platform equate to purging evidence of fraud? If there is evidence of fraud this may be shared but would not solely exist on a social media platform. Unless fraudeurs would openly discuss these matters, of course.
- manfredo 6y ago
  Dropping Parler is part of a broader trend of eliminating content claiming electoral fraud: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/07/youtube-says-it-will-suspend-channels-claiming-widespread-voter-fraud.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/07/youtube-says-it-will-suspend...

igetspam 6y ago

I don't think that's the goal. I think the goal for those companies is to not lose business over this. This is the free market at its best. Market pressure has made the math pretty simple: if N customers won't do business with my company because we do business with Abhorrent Co and the potential revenue loss from losing those N companies is greater than the revenue I generate from Abhorrent Co, then drop Abhorrent Co. If any of those companies felt the ethical/moral value of Parler was more valuable than the lost revenue, they wouldn't drop them. Obviously that's not the case. The moral here is pretty simple: don't be a Nazi.

loudtieblahblah 6y ago
Not everyone right of Biden is a nazi.
- igetspam 6y ago
  And not everyone "right of Biden" is being deplatformed, unless you think everyone right of center is on Parler. Parler is a cesspool of hate groups and conspiracy theories, many of them Nazi or Nazi adjacent.
  - loudtieblahblah 6y ago
    Not everyone you disagree with is a nazi.
    - phoobahr 6y ago
      This is not a helpful take when there are actual nazi's - right over there - talking about (and doing) nazi shit. And the thing about shit is it does splash damage. When cesspools like twitter and facebook finally give up their add revenue from the flies circling said shit and the turds have to go live in a latrine maybe _just_maybe_ someone should be asking "Are we the baddies?". Furthermore when someone does try to start cleaning up this shit, and it's always a terrible nasty thankless job, and you're inconvenienced because you're standing too close maybe the question shouldn't be "what about my rights?" But "why the hell am I here in the first place?" Shit.
      - loudtieblahblah 6y ago
        there are actual nazis, muslim extremists, antifa types, and all sorts encouraging violence on Twitter and facebook right now. right now you can go and find propaganda pages from the world's most repressive and violent regimes, like Saudi Arabia, for example. When Uganda banned Twitter/Facebook for election interference, all of a sudden "free speech" rights matter to these platforms and they find it unjust. you could argue the majority of the protest at DC was organized on major platforms over Parler. So why are we de-platforming major players through our ISPs? Why isn't verizon or comcast blocking Facebook or Twitter. Go get your own series of tubes. Parler, like Twitter, has a team of people who work to remove posts in violation of the rules. A political situation and some token examples are being exploited to take out a competitor. And it just so happens that the Dems are going to chair all the Congressional committees that over see Silicon Valley, you're going to have a Dem house, senate and POTUS. This right here is being taken advantage of to take an an entire wing of a debate and to tilt poltical power. And the populace is cheering it on. Just like they cheered on the Iraq War and the Patriot Act. It's a common bi-partisan tactic to blame the whole for the actions of the fringe and use that as a wedge. It's like how my Trumper father rags on PETA when he wants to complain about environmentalism. This is the same crap. Except at a far larger level, far more cynical an far more corrupt. We're losing our ability for free speech, people -LEFTISTS of all people - are celebrating a handful of tech monopolies, acting in unison as some kind of cabal, led by a singular political party in this country - this is the merging of capital and state that you see in fascist societies, all the while shouting the loudest about anti-fascism. Just like the Koch brothers shouting about liberty and freedom, things tend to not mean what people claim they mean. And you're all a bunch of suckers for buying this horsepucky, hook, line and sinker. I'm a Bernie (except on this issue), AOC, Nader loving social democrat. But "my side" is selling it's proverbial sole to the devil b/c "winning" means more than any foundational values that should apply to us all. We're no longer agreeing on a even playing field. Democracy is up for grabs by both sides if it means one of them stands a chance at winning. And both sides only happen to see this destructive behavior in the other and never in the mirror.

salawat 6y ago

I can honestly say that with what little time I have, and limited access to info, I can't really convincingly dispel the feeling that there was fraud from people. I've seen State responses, I've talked to people. I follow up on both sides takes on things. These last few days though have started to convince me that there is a huge problem, way bigger even than election fraud, and it's the sheer rapidity that agenda's can get rolled out by platforms, or handily shutdown. People recognize that. It encourages them to then spread info the old fashion way, and well... You might have a pandemic going on which helps isolating people from each other, but the lines are still open. I think GP is definitely right. This is half tge reason why I felt the only thing to do that would make sense was a full public accounting of every facet of every suspected voting process. Audits, machines, software, configurations, datasets, all of it. There is no way you hold it tight to your chest and come out of it with everyone unified to move forward, and no offence, but I don't trust anyone on Earth with the technology for successful mass management of unruly populations. A pity that quality doesn't appear more universal as evidenced by current events.

panarky 6y ago

Censoring ISIS beheading and recruiting videos was effective. Any resentment or suspicion of censorship was far more than offset by the reduction in reach. Suppressing incitement to violence along with the recruitment, training and organization of violent actors is essential.

thu2111 6y ago
You don't actually know that. Clearly, ISIS didn't need YouTube to spread. It conquered large parts of Syria and was defeated via military means. Plenty of ISIS sympathisers turned up in the west later, but I don't recall reading about many that were radicalised by watching YouTube. Normally they'd either been to Syria, or it was local mosques.