5 ms·

I mean, it's great to get some stuff on the record (and as a German myself I see our courts as one of the stronger checks on power in general, they've been impe

I mean, it's great to get some stuff on the record (and as a German myself I see our courts as one of the stronger checks on power in general, they've been imperfect but overall pretty reliable). But I'm not sure what the researchers are trying to find that's not already in plain sight. By now it's pretty clear that the network is actively driving discourse in one specific direction. And with Musk's involvement in the US admin, it's even more officially a non-friendly foreign actor than tiktok is.

jampekka 2y ago
> By now it's pretty clear that the network is actively driving discourse in one specific direction. Research is exactly about not just taking a look and declaring something "pretty clear". Also what "a direction" is not clear, or the dynamics of what affects the direction etc.
- tyre 2y ago
  It’s pretty clear. There were a few shifts that happened: 1. Musk bought twitter 2. Musk, despite being the wealthiest person on earth and running companies that are genuinely fascinating, has nonetheless—against overwhelming odds—been considered a loser. 3. Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right. Petty grievances, anti-free speech, “burn it down”, etc. 4. Twitter made changes under Musk that compensated large accounts based on the number of views or engagements. Effectively a rev share for ad spend 5. Because Musk can massively amplify content and has a fragile ego, aligning yourself with Musk’s pet issues directly affects income for influencers. Accounts in the other direction can be demonetized and deprioritized on feeds. This has led to large accounts, in the run up to the election, being very vocally trump even when they’ve had publicly leftist leanings in the past. It wasn’t a shift in policy positions. It was a shift to ragebait and memes that were more likely to get Elon’s attention and retweets. So it is both pretty clear and a result of active decisions in one specific direction. We don’t need a multi-year quintuple blind study by esteemed Ivy League research fellows to do the basic observation and deduction of the situation.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
    > We don’t need a multi-year quintuple blind study by esteemed Ivy League research fellows to do the basic observation and deduction of the situation. Of course not, they're going to provide more precise data and facts. Perhaps many don't need the data to arrive at conclusions the data will point to but that does not obviate the utility of the research. Really, if you think their data will point to these conclusions, one would think you'd be that much more interested to see that the research is being conducted.
  - jampekka 2y ago
    I'm partial to believing Musk's control and personal beliefs have been a factor in changes in Xitter discourse. But what would be effective ways for convincing others? Also I like to think I verify my beliefs with systematic analysis. Furthermore, these points don't give any analysis of how this change has evolved, exactly how the messaging has changed, what's been the timeline etc. Not checking your assumptions with data, and furher rejecting attempts to do this, is what I think is a large part driving what's happening. But for sure I'd like a reality check for my thinking.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    > 2. Musk, despite being the wealthiest person on earth and running companies that are genuinely fascinating, has nonetheless—against overwhelming odds—been considered a loser. I've never heard or seen that. Musk is a public figure and subject to much criticism, but so are all public figures and Musk actively provokes it (that is, Musk trolls for it). > 3. Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right. Petty grievances, anti-free speech, “burn it down”, etc. Lots of wealthy SV people have gone hard right; they don't all have relatively fragile egos. Musk is following the herd. It's pardoxical that people think Musk, Zuckerberg, etc. are geniuses when they both follow the herd and have chosen a herd that is running off a cliff. They did not invent this ideology (who did?).
  - kouteiheika 2y ago
    > Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right. This is such a weird take. While I don't disagree about Musk's ego, it should be quite obvious that there's something else at play here, considering an unhinged convicted criminal won the popular vote and became a president. I've personally seen multiple people go through the same shift to the right as Musk. Are they all losers? Or maybe, just maybe, some of the more insane policies of the current American left have pushed them there?
1234letshaveatw 2y ago
Non-friendly meaning not single sided in favor of your preferred political orientation. As a US citizen I find the discourse on X to be nowhere near as directed compared to platforms such as reddit or bsky- I am sure you are deeply concerned about that issue as well, even though you left it unsaid
- lazyeye 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - concordDance 2y ago
    While that might be applicable in many cases it isn't in this particular one. Both the main subreddits and blue sky's default moderation prohibit things in the middle of the right's Overton Window (e.g. on Trump or trans rights) while X does not prohibit things in the middle of the left's Overton Window. (I dislike using the terms "left" and "right", but as vague as they are, this phenomena applies for almost all such categorizations)
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      > Both the main subreddits and blue sky's default moderation prohibit things in the middle of the right's Overton Window (e.g. on Trump or trans rights) while X does not prohibit things in the middle of the left's Overton Window. I think that's what the previous poster's 'Yes "when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."' is talking about, given Twitter fell into the same camp as Bluesky and said subreddits, pre-Musk.
      - lazyeye 2y ago
        Yes exactly. I should have been more clearer. Read that as "when your accustomed to left-wing bias, a balanced media feels like right-wing bias".
lazyeye 2y ago
"By now it's pretty clear that the network is actively driving discourse in one specific direction..." I don't think this is clear at all.
jeroenhd 2y ago
Elon's proclamation of far-right ideas is pretty obvious, but Twitter as a platform isn't Elon. It shouldn't be too hard to find evidence of a more direct link from Twitter itself given the general vibe there, but until there's concrete proof there's nothing much people and countries can do. Before foreign influence laws can be applied, you need proof. Without proof, Twitter could sue governments and make a hefty additional profit. Lack of quality research has previously gotten Intel off the hook for their illegal dealings, costing the EU half a billion in interest once the dust settled. We need either cold, hard facts or more vague laws to pull off something like a TikTok ban in the EU.

jampekka 2y ago

> By now it's pretty clear that the network is actively driving discourse in one specific direction. Research is exactly about not just taking a look and declaring something "pretty clear". Also what "a direction" is not clear, or the dynamics of what affects the direction etc.

tyre 2y ago
It’s pretty clear. There were a few shifts that happened: 1. Musk bought twitter 2. Musk, despite being the wealthiest person on earth and running companies that are genuinely fascinating, has nonetheless—against overwhelming odds—been considered a loser. 3. Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right. Petty grievances, anti-free speech, “burn it down”, etc. 4. Twitter made changes under Musk that compensated large accounts based on the number of views or engagements. Effectively a rev share for ad spend 5. Because Musk can massively amplify content and has a fragile ego, aligning yourself with Musk’s pet issues directly affects income for influencers. Accounts in the other direction can be demonetized and deprioritized on feeds. This has led to large accounts, in the run up to the election, being very vocally trump even when they’ve had publicly leftist leanings in the past. It wasn’t a shift in policy positions. It was a shift to ragebait and memes that were more likely to get Elon’s attention and retweets. So it is both pretty clear and a result of active decisions in one specific direction. We don’t need a multi-year quintuple blind study by esteemed Ivy League research fellows to do the basic observation and deduction of the situation.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
  > We don’t need a multi-year quintuple blind study by esteemed Ivy League research fellows to do the basic observation and deduction of the situation. Of course not, they're going to provide more precise data and facts. Perhaps many don't need the data to arrive at conclusions the data will point to but that does not obviate the utility of the research. Really, if you think their data will point to these conclusions, one would think you'd be that much more interested to see that the research is being conducted.
- jampekka 2y ago
  I'm partial to believing Musk's control and personal beliefs have been a factor in changes in Xitter discourse. But what would be effective ways for convincing others? Also I like to think I verify my beliefs with systematic analysis. Furthermore, these points don't give any analysis of how this change has evolved, exactly how the messaging has changed, what's been the timeline etc. Not checking your assumptions with data, and furher rejecting attempts to do this, is what I think is a large part driving what's happening. But for sure I'd like a reality check for my thinking.
- mmooss 2y ago
  > 2. Musk, despite being the wealthiest person on earth and running companies that are genuinely fascinating, has nonetheless—against overwhelming odds—been considered a loser. I've never heard or seen that. Musk is a public figure and subject to much criticism, but so are all public figures and Musk actively provokes it (that is, Musk trolls for it). > 3. Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right. Petty grievances, anti-free speech, “burn it down”, etc. Lots of wealthy SV people have gone hard right; they don't all have relatively fragile egos. Musk is following the herd. It's pardoxical that people think Musk, Zuckerberg, etc. are geniuses when they both follow the herd and have chosen a herd that is running off a cliff. They did not invent this ideology (who did?).
- kouteiheika 2y ago
  > Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right. This is such a weird take. While I don't disagree about Musk's ego, it should be quite obvious that there's something else at play here, considering an unhinged convicted criminal won the popular vote and became a president. I've personally seen multiple people go through the same shift to the right as Musk. Are they all losers? Or maybe, just maybe, some of the more insane policies of the current American left have pushed them there?

1234letshaveatw 2y ago

Non-friendly meaning not single sided in favor of your preferred political orientation. As a US citizen I find the discourse on X to be nowhere near as directed compared to platforms such as reddit or bsky- I am sure you are deeply concerned about that issue as well, even though you left it unsaid

lazyeye 2y ago
[flagged]
- concordDance 2y ago
  While that might be applicable in many cases it isn't in this particular one. Both the main subreddits and blue sky's default moderation prohibit things in the middle of the right's Overton Window (e.g. on Trump or trans rights) while X does not prohibit things in the middle of the left's Overton Window. (I dislike using the terms "left" and "right", but as vague as they are, this phenomena applies for almost all such categorizations)
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    > Both the main subreddits and blue sky's default moderation prohibit things in the middle of the right's Overton Window (e.g. on Trump or trans rights) while X does not prohibit things in the middle of the left's Overton Window. I think that's what the previous poster's 'Yes "when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."' is talking about, given Twitter fell into the same camp as Bluesky and said subreddits, pre-Musk.
    - lazyeye 2y ago
      Yes exactly. I should have been more clearer. Read that as "when your accustomed to left-wing bias, a balanced media feels like right-wing bias".

lazyeye 2y ago

"By now it's pretty clear that the network is actively driving discourse in one specific direction..." I don't think this is clear at all.

jeroenhd 2y ago

Elon's proclamation of far-right ideas is pretty obvious, but Twitter as a platform isn't Elon. It shouldn't be too hard to find evidence of a more direct link from Twitter itself given the general vibe there, but until there's concrete proof there's nothing much people and countries can do. Before foreign influence laws can be applied, you need proof. Without proof, Twitter could sue governments and make a hefty additional profit. Lack of quality research has previously gotten Intel off the hook for their illegal dealings, costing the EU half a billion in interest once the dust settled. We need either cold, hard facts or more vague laws to pull off something like a TikTok ban in the EU.