2 ms·
The use of a spam filter suggests that some moderation is widely acceptable. Another problem is how disinformation spreads, which can cause significant harm whe
by edmundsauto 3y ago
The use of a spam filter suggests that some moderation is widely acceptable. Another problem is how disinformation spreads, which can cause significant harm when it influences people's perspectives to not get the whooping cough vaccine, for a fairly controversial example.
People are monkeys. Monkey see, monkey do.
- AnthonyMouse 3y agoA spam filter blocks messages the recipient doesn't want. Censorship blocks messages the recipient does want. (This also implies that a spam filter that can't be configured or disabled by the user can result in censorship.)
- abenga 3y ago> A spam filter blocks messages the recipient doesn't want. Censorship blocks messages the recipient does want. This is only true if these companies only ever show you content from the people you have explicitly followed/subscribed to.
- AnthonyMouse 3y agoThey often do block content from the people you have explicitly followed/subscribed to. But suppose they write a generic algorithm that tries to show people what it think they will like. Then they find that some people like sexiness and political memes from The Other Tribe, so they modify the algorithm to not show those things to people even if it's what they want to see. Clearly and intentionally censorship. You could even plausibly argue that not allowing the user to substitute an algorithm of their own (or one of their choosing from an independent third party) is censorship, if the only way to receive the data on that platform is through their algorithm which will not show you information that you want.
- edmundsauto 3y agoBy this definition, censorship is in the eye of the beholder? I understand the slippery slope argument, but I don't think I have much of an issue with the vast majority of stuff that gets highlighted as being blocked. Spam, antivaxxers, Nazis... all content I don't want to receive.
- AnthonyMouse 3y agoIt's not in the eye of the beholder. It's blocking which is not in the control of the recipient. There is nothing wrong with a filter that tries to block anti-vaxxers, as long as you're explicitly aware that it's happening and can freely and easily turn it off.