5 ms·
I always find it interesting to hypothesize why an automated system does the things it does (the implied theory in the OP video is, unsurprisingly, idiotic). I
by wutbrodo 5y ago
I always find it interesting to hypothesize why an automated system does the things it does (the implied theory in the OP video is, unsurprisingly, idiotic).
I'd assume that it's a blunt filter that tries to catch racism by not allowing people to say "black" in their advertising profiles. The reason "white" isn't caught up in this filter is probably because the consensus doesn't consider it to be racism when directed at whites ("racism = power + prejudice", all whites have institutional power, etc). I'd guess that the same block would be in place for other groups that are considered to be the "oppressed" instead of the "oppressors" under the childish, binary framework that afflicts so many these days. I'd also guess that "Trying to fix white people" or "Against white people" would be allowed, while the analogues for "black" wouldn't be.
That is to say, their threat model is aimed at _negative_ racial phrases, not positive ones (even ones that they wouod definitely reject under manual review, like "pro white supremacy"). The examples in the video are artifacts of this clumsy approach, not evidence of a conspiracy to keep black creators down like the metaphorical Alex Jones in the OP video claims.
- whiddershins 5y ago"the consensus" I don't agree that there is consensus on this definition. It has been around since at least the 1960s and has always been controversial.
- wutbrodo 5y agoI'm being a little imprecise with my terminology, sorry about that. > It has been around since at least the 1960s and has always been controversial. It has been around since the 1960s, as an academic curiosity. In the last half decade to decade, it metastasized into the rest of society and embedded itself deeply, almost religiously, into all of the institutions that shape our discourse. There's no such thing as a society-wide consensus, on pretty much anything (you can even find thoughtful "legalize possession of child porn" takes, like Falkvinge's). But institutional consensus is as close as we come to this, and has real and significant coercive (and doctrinal) power in the form of the media, university curriculums, HR departments, PR departments, etc etc etc.
- jaywalk 5y agoThis is by far the most likely reason for what's being seen, but it's not going to get views like this sensationalist video claiming that TikTok is anti-black.
- tuesdayrain 5y ago>"racism = power + prejudice", all whites have institutional power, etc) Oh please. The attempt to redefine "racism" to exclude white people is itself hilariously racist. It's propaganda that tries to influence people through deceptive language. If the people behind that had honest intentions they would have created a new word to describe the phenomenon rather than try to redefine existing words.
- mizzack 5y agoI don't think the person you're replying to said anything that disagrees with your assessment.
- tuesdayrain 5y agoHe implied this definition was the consensus, when it's an alternate definition used mainly by anti-white activists.
- Huwyt_Nashi052 5y agoAnd these anti-White activists have extraordinary power in academia, politics, the press, etc. You won't find a relevant textbook in use in major universities that doesn't support this definition, perhaps even explicitly. It would be a brave politician to openly object to this concept. What is said in private may be different, but publicly this definition has the consensus in the modern West.
- tuesdayrain 5y agoYes it is an unfortunately common definition among the groups you mentioned, but I still believe those people to be a minority relative to the population. The dictionary.com definition for racism says nothing about power being a requirement: A belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.