4 ms·
Mass surveillance silences minority opinions, according to study (2016)
- hcfman 3y agoIn the Netherlands there’s a log of self censorship by the newspapers themselves. This is particularly true of the smaller local region papers. These papers are often fed a steady stream of crime related stories from the police. They are quite afraid to criticise the police or government as a result. For example the Limburger. I had a story about serious corruption within the justice department. But they wouldn’t print this unless they had three independent sources they said. No matter how good the proof was. The proof is to be a source in this you pretty much had to be involved or a victim. And the source would have to be prepared to incriminate themselves and break confidentiality with serious implications to themselves. That’s an assuredly high bar and thus they silence themselves.
- hcfman 3y agoPlus I was told by someone that should know that they receive subsidies to be in Sittard.
- walterbell 3y agohttps://archive.is/IH17Q https://archive.is/IH17Q
- mock-possum 3y ago> the echo-chamber effect, in which we tailor our opinions to fit the online Oh wow do ‘we’ do that? I’m pretty sure I do the opposite. Also, that’s not what most people mean when they use the phrase “echo-chamber” - it’s not that you tailor your opinions, it’s that the algorithm tailors the content it serves you. Wonder if that’s a deliberate misstatement, considering the Washington Post would be the one guilty of facilitating the creation of an echo chamber… shifting blame to users / readers seems kinda sus
- Nasrudith 3y agoWe have long seen echo chambers outside of algorithims back when the word was obscure. The phrase "preaching to the choir" is quite illustrative of this effect as the fringe or extremes select for friendly locales. In addition to that are leaders being surrounded by yes-men and culturally ensuring dissent is hidden.
- spacebacon 3y agoPreach
- sublinear 3y agoSo most people find they have nothing important to say and the rest of us know important things to say are risky. Is this news? This is ancient common sense.
- barrysteve 3y agoThe news is being unable to opt out or have downtime away from surveillance. Honestly who wants to have a private relationship that is constantly surveilled. The only places left to have a private conversation with my wife, is underground or in outer space. Surveilling my bedroom is offensive.
- ssss11 3y agoIn other news, Sun is hot according to study (2016)
- walterbell 3y agoReading past the headline: > Participants who shared the “nothing to hide” belief, those who tended to support mass surveillance as necessary for national security, were the most likely to silence their minority opinions. “The fact that the 'nothing to hide' individuals experience a significant chilling effect speaks to how online privacy is much bigger than the mere lawfulness of one's actions. It's about a fundamental human right to have control over one's self-presentation and image, in private, and now, in search histories and metadata,” she said.
- spacebacon 3y agoHow surveillance modifies behavior. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/node/54994 https://www.harvardmagazine.com/node/54994 From a quantum perspective… observing someone obviously changes that person. From an entrapment perspective, any average Joe can be lead down any road one wishes with enough persistence.
- TriangleEdge 3y agoThe points system on HN threads also silences unpopular minority opinions. It becomes really scary to me when it's a mass surveillance + unwarranted searches + automated censorship. I think AI tools could really boost the "automated censorship" part of the equation.
- steponlego 3y agoWorking as intended. The science is settled, the majority opinions are the correct ones.