3 ms·

But claims that right wing voices are being censored would come from... right wing sources, no? Are those valid but not the left wing sources? If so, why?

phpisthebest 4y ago
Claims that right wing voices are being censored are from my own observations. including the examples I cited in my comment. To be clear I do not think left voices should be censored, I am 100% opposed to all censorship, banning ect In the 90's I was fighting conservatives that wanted to censor the much smaller and newer internet from things like violence (games) and porn. Today it is the left that is attempting to censor the internet over much more nebulous and undefined terms like "misinformation" and "hate speech" all of which have very subjective definitions and seem to be a moving target.
- kevingadd 4y ago
  What I'm hearing here is "my viewpoint is valid because I observed it, and the viewpoint that disagrees with me is biased". Your observations may happen to generalize and be correct, and the other viewpoint may be biased, but that doesn't mean the argument you made in the previous post was correctly reasoned. If data or research can't support "right wing voices are being censored", while you're perfectly entitled to believe that based on seeing a couple specific voices get censored, it's a bit unreasonable to dismiss claims to the contrary as "left wing bias" when the data simply isn't there to support it. I personally wouldn't be surprised if you end up with political bias in automated censorship and filtering algorithms, the training set is going to be full of bias and it will be hard to filter that out. But they also quite possibly managed to come up with something that isn't leaning in any particular direction. Between the two possibilities "Twitter is suppressing <x> speech" and "Twitter is not suppressing <x> speech and a few people are crying censorship to try and get unbanned/get attention" I think occam's razor suggests the latter, personally, because we know it has been an effective tactic in the past and that sort of speculative claim gains traction regardless of whether you can prove it. Lots of people claim to be shadowbanned when they're not, similarly.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    >>If data or research can't support "right wing voices are being censored" You seemed to have missed my primary assertion which has nothing to do with banning or shadowbanning or even the research into those topics My primary assertion is the terms of service, the rules under which content moderation is governed is a left political bias in many area's include gender, what is considered "hate speech", what is "misinformation" I do not need to point to any examples of banning to highlight this as it self evident for anyone that reads the terms of service.

phpisthebest 4y ago

Claims that right wing voices are being censored are from my own observations. including the examples I cited in my comment. To be clear I do not think left voices should be censored, I am 100% opposed to all censorship, banning ect In the 90's I was fighting conservatives that wanted to censor the much smaller and newer internet from things like violence (games) and porn. Today it is the left that is attempting to censor the internet over much more nebulous and undefined terms like "misinformation" and "hate speech" all of which have very subjective definitions and seem to be a moving target.

kevingadd 4y ago
What I'm hearing here is "my viewpoint is valid because I observed it, and the viewpoint that disagrees with me is biased". Your observations may happen to generalize and be correct, and the other viewpoint may be biased, but that doesn't mean the argument you made in the previous post was correctly reasoned. If data or research can't support "right wing voices are being censored", while you're perfectly entitled to believe that based on seeing a couple specific voices get censored, it's a bit unreasonable to dismiss claims to the contrary as "left wing bias" when the data simply isn't there to support it. I personally wouldn't be surprised if you end up with political bias in automated censorship and filtering algorithms, the training set is going to be full of bias and it will be hard to filter that out. But they also quite possibly managed to come up with something that isn't leaning in any particular direction. Between the two possibilities "Twitter is suppressing <x> speech" and "Twitter is not suppressing <x> speech and a few people are crying censorship to try and get unbanned/get attention" I think occam's razor suggests the latter, personally, because we know it has been an effective tactic in the past and that sort of speculative claim gains traction regardless of whether you can prove it. Lots of people claim to be shadowbanned when they're not, similarly.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  >>If data or research can't support "right wing voices are being censored" You seemed to have missed my primary assertion which has nothing to do with banning or shadowbanning or even the research into those topics My primary assertion is the terms of service, the rules under which content moderation is governed is a left political bias in many area's include gender, what is considered "hate speech", what is "misinformation" I do not need to point to any examples of banning to highlight this as it self evident for anyone that reads the terms of service.