3 ms·
Since the moderation practices that must be disclosed also cover things like hate speech or harassment and other generally illegal speech, then the platform can
by cornholio 3y ago
Since the moderation practices that must be disclosed also cover things like hate speech or harassment and other generally illegal speech, then the platform can't simply answer in that fashion, because the court will issue a default judgment against the "social media company that has not made a reasonable, good faith attempt to comply", as per AB 587.
Also, the "feelings" of the moderators imply human moderators exist and are the norm. This might not be true and you would be submitting false information for an AI-heavy moderation pipeline.
- sneak 3y agoHate speech and most speech that falls under the category presently described by social media users in 2023 as "harassment" is decidedly not illegal, and is in fact protected expression. Threats are not protected, but the vaguely defined concept of "hate speech" that is not already-illegal direct threats of violence isn't really a thing. This seems to be a common misconception. If it were violent threats, which are illegal, people would just call it that. When people say "hate speech" they are attempting to promote censorship of otherwise-legal expression that most of society nevertheless finds repugnant.
- Guvante 3y agoYou are mixing many different viewpoints here and it is diluting whatever point you were making. Harassment has a legal definition and so a law referring to it is not "as described by social media users"... You then decide by fiat that the entire thing is pointless because of how you feel which ignores the very real problems on social media of exactly the kinds of messaging you claim this isn't about.
- edgyquant 3y ago“Hate speech,” is not a real thing or illegal under US law
- JoeAltmaier 3y agoWrong, and wrong. Plenty of definitions that make it a 'real thing'. And plenty of ways it's being enforced across the US.