3 ms·
Instead it’s up to the social media companies, who we know are invested in controlling content on their platforms. And [what I perceive as] a majority of HN use
by psyc 5y ago
Instead it’s up to the social media companies, who we know are invested in controlling content on their platforms. And [what I perceive as] a majority of HN users have been arguing all along that it’s wholly their prerogative to censor whatever they choose to. What kind of “change” is that? These behemoths are the new establishment, are they not?
I checked the #ukraine tag on TikTok and found zero raw on the ground videos of conflict. Looks totally sanitized to me. Maybe I didn’t look hard enough. Maybe it’s merely hard to find. Maybe it isn’t allowed.
- tsol 5y agoThis is an interesting point. While newspapers would sometimes publish graphic images to show the reality on the ground during war, on social media gore is strictly not allowed. Even if there were recordings of awful war crimes being committed, would they be able to be shared freely? I imagine it'd be one of those times where you see a link reading "X soldiers committing heinous war crimes", click the link, and are met with "Sorry! This post has been removed for violating community guidelines". If your lucky someone will have linked a mirror in the comments section, but oftentimes that comment gets deleted rather quickly too. I don't know if any social media platform wants to be the associated with pictures of shocking traumatic acts of war.
- avereveard 5y agoIt's not an hypothetical, WWII historical content has been systematically epurated last five years.
- Lascaille 5y ago>It's not an hypothetical, WWII historical content has been systematically epurated last five years. Try and find a copy of the 'Horst Wessel lied' on YouTube any more, for example. Or 'Triumph of the Will.'
- seanw444 5y agoIt's truly a shame that LiveLeak got shut down. It would have been perfect for this conflict.