4 ms·

Then stop censoring. Look at what happened in this post. Experts said X, the author said Y, and Y was censored because it disagreed with the experts. Later t

Then stop censoring. Look at what happened in this post. Experts said X, the author said Y, and Y was censored because it disagreed with the experts. Later the experts admitted that X was incorrect. Of course, the experts, who ended up being wrong faced no consequences, while the author who ended up being right was censored. The experts are essentially a privileged class whose opinions are considered to be true by default, and when they get things wrong, it is assumed that this is just a good faith mistake, and forgiven. Everybody else is assumed to be wrong by default, and spreading politically motivated misinformation. When they are right it is assumed to be a fluke and swept under the rug. In this environment the only logical response is to mistrust the appointed "experts." If they are what they say they are let them defend their point against all challengers.

nescioquid 5y ago
> Then stop censoring. And stop dissembling. For instance, Fauci's early statements on mask-wearing were calculated to preserve the supply of N95 masks for medical personnel. However laudable the intent, it betrays what I imagine is an endemic world-view that the masses must be manipulated, rather than dealt with honestly. This morning, an NPR report about the new CDC quarantine guidelines acknowledged criticisms/allegations of corporate lobbying for the policy change and internal fears of staffing for critical services, which was followed-up by a "follow the science" platitude.
sutuplesu 5y ago
Facebook's actions keep being cast as if there is a completely open, level, neutral field that the censorious fact checkers are now distorting. But that's not the starting point. Facebook already has its thumb -- if not both hands and an elbow! -- on the scale, as far as what content is dispersed. The view is distorted to begin with, by Facebook choosing what is promoted and what is not. They may not be doing a particularly good job un-distorting it, but it's not a choice between pure and free exchange of information and censorship. It is between whether Facebook is going to manipulate in both directions -- promoting and taking down -- or just one. (Note that I don't think either of these choices are particularly good. I would prefer that Facebook did neither.)

nescioquid 5y ago

> Then stop censoring. And stop dissembling. For instance, Fauci's early statements on mask-wearing were calculated to preserve the supply of N95 masks for medical personnel. However laudable the intent, it betrays what I imagine is an endemic world-view that the masses must be manipulated, rather than dealt with honestly. This morning, an NPR report about the new CDC quarantine guidelines acknowledged criticisms/allegations of corporate lobbying for the policy change and internal fears of staffing for critical services, which was followed-up by a "follow the science" platitude.

sutuplesu 5y ago

Facebook's actions keep being cast as if there is a completely open, level, neutral field that the censorious fact checkers are now distorting. But that's not the starting point. Facebook already has its thumb -- if not both hands and an elbow! -- on the scale, as far as what content is dispersed. The view is distorted to begin with, by Facebook choosing what is promoted and what is not. They may not be doing a particularly good job un-distorting it, but it's not a choice between pure and free exchange of information and censorship. It is between whether Facebook is going to manipulate in both directions -- promoting and taking down -- or just one. (Note that I don't think either of these choices are particularly good. I would prefer that Facebook did neither.)