7 ms·

Parler Raises $20M

45 points by lxm 5y ago

Barrin92 5y ago
Given that all of the services targeting that particular political demographic seem to be largely undifferentiated when it comes to the apps themselves it's gonna be interesting to see how quickly they'll start to cannibalize each other once the Mercer money dries up.
willio58 5y ago
I think this or some other conservative social media actually gaining some dominance is very likely. Especially with all of the permanent bans recently happening on twitter and facebook. Imagine the power of the echo chamber when the whole point of an app is to be republican-twitter or republican-facebook.
- tasogare 5y ago
  No need to imagine when we have left-twitter already.
  - doopy1 5y ago
    Twitter has a lot of community subsets, so you're right. We can also see what it looks like on reddit.
  - seattle_spring 5y ago
    Considering it's still dead simple to become inundated with far right opinions and conspiracy theories on twitter, it's a bit of a stretch to claim it's "left-twitter." Just because the most egregious and dangerous stuff from one side gets deleted does not mean it's a place only for the polar opposite.
    - lazyeye 5y ago
      Ive found Twitter leans left by about a ratio of 10 to 1. However the volume of users is sufficiently large that you can be swamped by any minority if you choose, no matter how tiny.
    - zapita 5y ago
      “left-twitter” simply designates a subcommunity within twitter. I don’t think OP meant that Twitter as a whole leans left. Many people have an opinion on that topic, but in reality it’s hard to know for sure as Twitter is very large.
- smackeyacky 5y ago
  Not sure its about power, more about access to a demographic that is pre filtered. Could be lucrative for certain advertisers who want to target the group who is attracted to parler. Although the crowds booing trump after he announced he had his vax booster shot should give advertisers in this space some pause, sometimes the messages and disinformation create a life of their own that doesn't follow the script.
- lazyeye 5y ago
  Why are you talking about an "echo chamber" in this instance as if this is some new thing?
- ravenstine 5y ago
  I don't consider myself conservative by any stretch of the imagination but part of the reason I don't even bother with mainstream social media (besides it just being a toxic idea on an individual level) is that I know I'd repeatedly get in trouble in spite of following the rules for being myself. Twitter is already an echo chamber, so it's really puzzling how all of a sudden the echo chamber problem needs to be pulled out for other platforms.
  - seattle_spring 5y ago
    What behaviors would you exhibit that you worry would get you in trouble?
    - errantmind 5y ago
      Incessant skepticism of the dominant narrative
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
anm89 5y ago
As someone who dislikes probably almost every single thing said o Parler, I'm glad it exists. Preventing people from talking is not the way to fix our problems
- newsbinator 5y ago
  I gave Gettr a try and came to the same conclusion. I can count on one half of one hand the number of people on there I'd be interested in seeing updates from. But I'm glad it exists as a place people can safely be wrong on the internet.
  - tqkxzugoaupvwqr 5y ago
    > I'm glad it exists as a place people can safely be wrong on the internet Have you considered that written words that remain uncontested (or unpunished if against the law) can lead to actions outside of the Internet where people are killed? Free speech just for the sake of it is not good for societies. I don’t know Gettr but Telegram is also a place where people can be safely wrong on the Internet. And it leads to calls for politicians to be murdered. Groups radicalize themselves in their thought bubbles, take the protest (in their eyes justified) to the streets, and even murder people (in their eyes justified) all because they can be safely wrong on the Internet.
    - greensalad 5y ago
      You are right, and that is why I want Twitter to cancel the account of the Taliban spokesman for terrorism, Saudi Arabia, whose king is a known killer, Iran leaders, for promoting homophobia, Egyptian government accounts for being a dictatorship, Chinese embassies Twitter accounts for defending the genocide in Xinjiang and a dozen other countries accounts should be cancelled too, as well as violence promoted by antifa twitter accounts, everybody should be boycotting Twitter until they stop promoting terrorism, violence and genocide, , it is disgraceful they are allowing the radicalisation of people that will end up in people being killed.
    - newsbinator 5y ago
moneywoes 5y ago
Fraction compared to DWAC but still a good sum
throwawaysea 5y ago
What sitting Congress members, big tech (Amazon, Apple, and Google), and others did to collude and blackhole Parler was disgusting. There is no room in an open society with classically liberal values for such censorship and abuse of power. As a reminder, AOC called for tech companies to block Parler and they all complied (https://greenwald.substack.com/p/how-silicon-valley-in-a-show-of-monopolistic https://greenwald.substack.com/p/how-silicon-valley-in-a-sho...). These are companies that have every incentive to obey, to avoid antitrust action due to their monopolistic practices. Tech companies also then muzzled a sitting President and continue to use the same playbook today against anyone who doesn’t share their ideology (recent example: https://thepostmillennial.com/youtube-removes-joe-rogan-interview-with-dr-robert-malone-from-youtube https://thepostmillennial.com/youtube-removes-joe-rogan-inte...). Meanwhile Facebook and Twitter, which played more of a role in the Capitol riot and in the numerous much more violent and damaging riots throughout 2020, faced no such pressure or consequence from politicians or technology companies. I have never posted on Parler. But the few times I glanced at it, the content seemed fine. Most importantly it was legally protected speech. I don’t agree with all my fellow citizens but I want them to be able to talk, and I want to hear their ideas. Parler raising funds is great news and I wish them luck. Even if I disagree with their audience.
- gpu_explorer 5y ago
  Companies do not have to allow people to use their platforms to engage in antisocial behavior. I'm sorry, but you can't go say whatever you want in the middle of a restaurant and assume that freedom of expression protects you from what happens when others don't want to hear what you have to say. Unless of course you're a toddler.
  - throwawaysea 5y ago
    Good thing we aren’t talking about restaurants. Social media companies are common carriers, just another set of telecom utilities that must be regulated so they cannot deny users access once they’re above a certain size. AWS is also just basic infrastructure the public is dependent on in our modern society and should be regulated similarly. All these companies face limited competition due to network effects and market capitalization, and should be regulated for antitrust reasons as well. And in all cases they must be forced to accept customers of all different persuasions. Political viewpoints should also be made a protected class formally. Also your claims of judging and disallowing speech on a subjective determination of being “antisocial” is exactly the kind of authoritarian kafka-esque censorship that makes the policies of these huge tech platforms incompatible with a free society.

45 points by lxm 5y ago

Given that all of the services targeting that particular political demographic seem to be largely undifferentiated when it comes to the apps themselves it's gonna be interesting to see how quickly they'll start to cannibalize each other once the Mercer money dries up.

willio58 5y ago

I think this or some other conservative social media actually gaining some dominance is very likely. Especially with all of the permanent bans recently happening on twitter and facebook. Imagine the power of the echo chamber when the whole point of an app is to be republican-twitter or republican-facebook.

tasogare 5y ago
No need to imagine when we have left-twitter already.
- doopy1 5y ago
  Twitter has a lot of community subsets, so you're right. We can also see what it looks like on reddit.
- seattle_spring 5y ago
  Considering it's still dead simple to become inundated with far right opinions and conspiracy theories on twitter, it's a bit of a stretch to claim it's "left-twitter." Just because the most egregious and dangerous stuff from one side gets deleted does not mean it's a place only for the polar opposite.
  - lazyeye 5y ago
    Ive found Twitter leans left by about a ratio of 10 to 1. However the volume of users is sufficiently large that you can be swamped by any minority if you choose, no matter how tiny.
  - zapita 5y ago
    “left-twitter” simply designates a subcommunity within twitter. I don’t think OP meant that Twitter as a whole leans left. Many people have an opinion on that topic, but in reality it’s hard to know for sure as Twitter is very large.
smackeyacky 5y ago
Not sure its about power, more about access to a demographic that is pre filtered. Could be lucrative for certain advertisers who want to target the group who is attracted to parler. Although the crowds booing trump after he announced he had his vax booster shot should give advertisers in this space some pause, sometimes the messages and disinformation create a life of their own that doesn't follow the script.
lazyeye 5y ago
Why are you talking about an "echo chamber" in this instance as if this is some new thing?
ravenstine 5y ago
I don't consider myself conservative by any stretch of the imagination but part of the reason I don't even bother with mainstream social media (besides it just being a toxic idea on an individual level) is that I know I'd repeatedly get in trouble in spite of following the rules for being myself. Twitter is already an echo chamber, so it's really puzzling how all of a sudden the echo chamber problem needs to be pulled out for other platforms.
- seattle_spring 5y ago
  What behaviors would you exhibit that you worry would get you in trouble?
  - errantmind 5y ago
    Incessant skepticism of the dominant narrative
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

anm89 5y ago

As someone who dislikes probably almost every single thing said o Parler, I'm glad it exists. Preventing people from talking is not the way to fix our problems

newsbinator 5y ago
I gave Gettr a try and came to the same conclusion. I can count on one half of one hand the number of people on there I'd be interested in seeing updates from. But I'm glad it exists as a place people can safely be wrong on the internet.
- tqkxzugoaupvwqr 5y ago
  > I'm glad it exists as a place people can safely be wrong on the internet Have you considered that written words that remain uncontested (or unpunished if against the law) can lead to actions outside of the Internet where people are killed? Free speech just for the sake of it is not good for societies. I don’t know Gettr but Telegram is also a place where people can be safely wrong on the Internet. And it leads to calls for politicians to be murdered. Groups radicalize themselves in their thought bubbles, take the protest (in their eyes justified) to the streets, and even murder people (in their eyes justified) all because they can be safely wrong on the Internet.
  - greensalad 5y ago
    You are right, and that is why I want Twitter to cancel the account of the Taliban spokesman for terrorism, Saudi Arabia, whose king is a known killer, Iran leaders, for promoting homophobia, Egyptian government accounts for being a dictatorship, Chinese embassies Twitter accounts for defending the genocide in Xinjiang and a dozen other countries accounts should be cancelled too, as well as violence promoted by antifa twitter accounts, everybody should be boycotting Twitter until they stop promoting terrorism, violence and genocide, , it is disgraceful they are allowing the radicalisation of people that will end up in people being killed.
  - newsbinator 5y ago

moneywoes 5y ago

Fraction compared to DWAC but still a good sum

throwawaysea 5y ago

What sitting Congress members, big tech (Amazon, Apple, and Google), and others did to collude and blackhole Parler was disgusting. There is no room in an open society with classically liberal values for such censorship and abuse of power. As a reminder, AOC called for tech companies to block Parler and they all complied (https://greenwald.substack.com/p/how-silicon-valley-in-a-show-of-monopolistic https://greenwald.substack.com/p/how-silicon-valley-in-a-sho...). These are companies that have every incentive to obey, to avoid antitrust action due to their monopolistic practices. Tech companies also then muzzled a sitting President and continue to use the same playbook today against anyone who doesn’t share their ideology (recent example: https://thepostmillennial.com/youtube-removes-joe-rogan-interview-with-dr-robert-malone-from-youtube https://thepostmillennial.com/youtube-removes-joe-rogan-inte...). Meanwhile Facebook and Twitter, which played more of a role in the Capitol riot and in the numerous much more violent and damaging riots throughout 2020, faced no such pressure or consequence from politicians or technology companies. I have never posted on Parler. But the few times I glanced at it, the content seemed fine. Most importantly it was legally protected speech. I don’t agree with all my fellow citizens but I want them to be able to talk, and I want to hear their ideas. Parler raising funds is great news and I wish them luck. Even if I disagree with their audience.

gpu_explorer 5y ago
Companies do not have to allow people to use their platforms to engage in antisocial behavior. I'm sorry, but you can't go say whatever you want in the middle of a restaurant and assume that freedom of expression protects you from what happens when others don't want to hear what you have to say. Unless of course you're a toddler.
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  Good thing we aren’t talking about restaurants. Social media companies are common carriers, just another set of telecom utilities that must be regulated so they cannot deny users access once they’re above a certain size. AWS is also just basic infrastructure the public is dependent on in our modern society and should be regulated similarly. All these companies face limited competition due to network effects and market capitalization, and should be regulated for antitrust reasons as well. And in all cases they must be forced to accept customers of all different persuasions. Political viewpoints should also be made a protected class formally. Also your claims of judging and disallowing speech on a subjective determination of being “antisocial” is exactly the kind of authoritarian kafka-esque censorship that makes the policies of these huge tech platforms incompatible with a free society.