4 ms·
Wow, this is kind of the beginning of the end of these platforms having essentially unlimited immunity from the content they host. I am of two minds on this -
by clay_the_ripper 3y ago
Wow, this is kind of the beginning of the end of these platforms having essentially unlimited immunity from the content they host.
I am of two minds on this - on one hand, do we really want Meta, a knowing producer of wildly attention-addictive products, to be the ones directing public discourse? No. Of course we don’t.
On the other hand, it’s clear Meta and the rest of the platforms are legitimately scared, and are going to wind down anything even slightly problematic, which is a bummer for the free web.
On balance this is probably a net positive for society as a whole, so I’m supportive of this change.
- singleshot_ 3y agoHow do you figure this is the beginning of the end? Haven’t these platforms been making editorial decisions to shape their coherent speech product more or less since Stratton Oakmont?
- jowea 3y agoI'm not sure I want Meta (or anyone) directing public discourse away from politics and controversial topics either.
- 15457345234 3y agoThe political discourse on Meta isn't politics, though, it's the simalcrum of politics. It's controversial national issues - that sometimes aren't even happening - and hot takes. There's no governance discourse, there's no actual organising or calls to action, it's just 'x happened, scream about how bad the other side are here.' If it were actual politics the division problem wouldn't be so bad.
- SllX 3y agoIt’s an editorial decision. Choosing the type of social media platform you want to build and the types of posts and posting types you want to support is all an editorial decision. Always has been. I’m pretty happy about this. I started losing interest in Threads the moment the politics started showing up which didn’t take very damn long.