3 ms·

I never understood this reasoning. Prior to X being purchased by Musk, every major social media platform had pretty much exactly the same speech policy. You'd s

by bko 2y ago

I never understood this reasoning. Prior to X being purchased by Musk, every major social media platform had pretty much exactly the same speech policy. You'd see decisions made in unison. For instance, this was the timeline for Trump being banned off social media January 6-7, 2021: Facebook and Instagram initially suspended Trump's accounts for 24 hours, then extended it "indefinitely" January 7, 2021: Twitch disabled Trump's channel January 8, 2021: Twitter permanently suspended Trump's @realDonaldTrump acc ount January 9, 2021: Several other platforms took action, including: Reddit banned the "r/DonaldTrump" subreddit Shopify removed Trump-related online stores Snapchat disabled Trump's account Various dates: Other platforms like YouTube, TikTok, Pinterest, and others implemented their own restrictions or bans around this time Obviously this banning didn't occur due to actions on their platforms, but an organized effort was made to remove a person's digital presence from the internet. And it more or less worked for a long time. Is a social media monoculture really a good thing? Nearly every other platform has pretty much the same policy on whatever the Mastodon CEO thinks is 'hate speech'.

subpixel 2y ago
[flagged]
- sandspar 2y ago
  If you're genuinely curious then we now know that much of these instances of blacklisting were due to all-but-direct intervention by the Biden administration, effectively unconstitutionally.
  - subpixel 2y ago
    Murthy v. Missouri would not have gone down as it did with the Roberts court if the process of suppressing lies was unconstitutional. They got it right the first time, and are only acting in their self-interest today.
raxxor 2y ago
I think in the case of X this wouldn't happen and this was political influence trying to silence him. Far more effective than Russian propaganda for that matter, here a presidential candidate was silenced. Fact checkers would make such phenomenon worse while community notes would just deliver more context. Be that as it may, that is a positive side of Musks takeover of X.

by bko 2y ago

subpixel 2y ago

[flagged]

sandspar 2y ago
If you're genuinely curious then we now know that much of these instances of blacklisting were due to all-but-direct intervention by the Biden administration, effectively unconstitutionally.
- subpixel 2y ago
  Murthy v. Missouri would not have gone down as it did with the Roberts court if the process of suppressing lies was unconstitutional. They got it right the first time, and are only acting in their self-interest today.

raxxor 2y ago

I think in the case of X this wouldn't happen and this was political influence trying to silence him. Far more effective than Russian propaganda for that matter, here a presidential candidate was silenced. Fact checkers would make such phenomenon worse while community notes would just deliver more context. Be that as it may, that is a positive side of Musks takeover of X.