5 ms·

> these kind of interventions on large scale social media networks are positive in my mind. I have an earnest and legitimate question for you and everyone else

• dotandgtfo 3y ago
  > I have an earnest and legitimate question for you and everyone else of this mindset: Do you believe that these social networks, the media, and the government will always be on the right side of history? Yes, I believe the local conditions where I am (Northern Europe and by extension the major powers in the EU) will stay stable enough for the foreseeable future that this will not turn into a 1984 scenario. I also understand why people of the United States may have a different view on this considering the unstable political situation you guys are in. I also want to make it clear that this instability is another argument on why relying on American tech platforms to moderate speech in the EU isn't a great option either. > Do you guys who advocate for this really believe that the risk of, for example, a Christian revival is precisely zero? That control of this apparatus would literally never shift, and the speech of your LGBTQ friends would never be brutally repressed by it? Yes, I do believe that it is exceedingly unlikely in Norway and the EU generally for the foreseeable future. Far less likely than the US at least. I think a major point that you need to understand to empathize with this perspective is that capitalism and technological advance is viewed with considerably less optimism and trust in the EU. Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, YouTube, Google (Search). All of these companies have a massive impact on the European public sphere. And none of these companies give a shit about the content they are promoting. How many Norwegian speaking moderators does Facebook have? How many Swiss? How many Lithuanian? How many Romanian? I bet way too few, and I bet their policies are more hands-off than hands-on. The more hands-on the more unpopular a platform becomes. I also bet that most moderation decisions are made by algorithms and not humans, which definitively affects speech. While these companies make billions unleashing software that stokes racial and ethnic tensions, polarises, legitimately makes people less informed. Algorithms that structurally amplify the simple, and deprioritise the complex. All in the name of engagement, retention and monetization. The effect these platforms have on Europe is massive, and I have more faith in democratic governments taking some of the reigns on this than the current state of American tech billionaires and board meetings behind closed doors. Americans have essentially accepted that corporations can use the populace as cattle to monetise. The EU has a different view on this. The current state of affairs is worse than the chances of misuse in the future is essentially the argument for moving power to the government or enforcing more controls on the platforms in this case.
  • catiopatio 3y ago
    In terms of political stability, Europe has a far worse track record than the US, and recently, too — running right up to the 2000s. The rise and fall of the Soviet bloc, Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, and even The Troubles in Northern Ireland — just to name a few! The majority of the past 75 years in Europe have seen serious, violent, and oppressive political turmoil. I don’t see how you can possibly take the position that Europe is more stable than the US, much less that Europe has a track record of stability sufficient to justify handing authority over speech and free association to the government without any concern for future abuse.