3 ms·
From my perspective the proper response to OP is to either 1. point out how the claims made about Parler are false. 2. point out that this is done by other la
by syops 6y ago
From my perspective the proper response to OP is to either
1. point out how the claims made about Parler are false.
2. point out that this is done by other large social media websites and thus Parler should not be singled out.
Keep in mind that by "this" in 2 I mean specifically that there are large social media sites that are designed specifically to enforce a certain political viewpoint. As I see it neither of these were done by you.
I think though that we will not agree on these points and I accept that. Thank you for the engagement. I will read and consider any response you have and leave the discussion at that.
- whimsicalism 6y ago> designed specifically to enforce a certain political viewpoint I'll try to break down my claim more simply. Saying something like "I don't really care about any political issues, but abortion is fundamentally wrong" is a political viewpoint. If IG took moderation action against people who were saying pro-abortion things, we would call that enforcing a certain political viewpoint. Similarly, a statement like "all claims are fine except for those that tie Biden's crime bill to mass incarceration" is, again, a political viewpoint. It perhaps doesn't map cleanly onto left or right or pro-Trump vs. anti-Trump, but the set of claims that IG picks to dispute is political because the issues around Biden's crime bill (for instance) were political. I'm neutral on whether Parler should be "singled out", my point was merely that the two conditions set up by OP are not sufficient to single out Parler, compared to the actions taken by other social media networks. Likewise, thanks for engaging.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]