NATION

PASSWORD

Facebook and Twitter CEOs grilled by Congress

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Do you think social media companies should be punished for engaging in political censorship?

Yes.
17
28%
No.
27
45%
Social media should be nationalized by the U.S. federal government.
5
8%
Social media should be banned.
11
18%
 
Total votes : 60

User avatar
Glorious Hong Kong
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1357
Founded: Nov 01, 2019
Ex-Nation

Facebook and Twitter CEOs grilled by Congress

Postby Glorious Hong Kong » Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:54 pm

'More power than traditional media': Facebook, Twitter policies attacked

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican senators on Tuesday attacked the chief executives of Facebook and Twitter for what they called censorship of President Trump and his allies during the U.S. election while Democrats bemoaned the spread of misinformation on social media.

The CEOs, Jack Dorsey of Twitter and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, defended their content moderation practices at a congressional hearing scheduled after the platforms decided to block stories from the New York Post that made claims about the son of then-Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

The move incited uproar among Republican lawmakers who have consistently accused the companies of anti-conservative bias.

In his opening remarks, Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham asked: “What I want to try to find out is if you’re not a newspaper at Twitter or Facebook, then why do you have editorial control over the New York Post?”

He said he did not think articles on Hunter Biden, refuted by the Biden campaign, needed to be flagged or excluded from distribution.

Democrats focused on the spread of misinformation by Trump, a Republican, and his supporters. They pushed the companies to limit the spread of false and misleading content ahead of elections in Georgia, where two Republican incumbent senators, David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, are facing run-offs against well-funded Democratic opponents - contests that will likely determine which party controls the Senate.

Zuckerberg and Dorsey admitted the companies have made some mistakes, but mostly defended their policies.
Slideshow ( 5 images )

However, broader problems with their content moderation decisions, especially around violent speech, became evident when Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, asked Facebook’s Zuckerberg if he would commit to taking down the account of former Trump White House adviser Steve Bannon after he suggested the beheading of two senior U.S. officials.

Zuckerberg refused. “Senator, no. That’s not what our policies would suggest that we should do in this case,” he said.

Reuters reported last week that Zuckerberg told an all-staff meeting that Bannon had not violated enough of Facebook’s policies to justify his suspension.

Blumenthal also noted that Alphabet Inc’s Google, which owns YouTube, had been given a “pass” from the hearing, saying that the company was being rewarded for its “timidity” in content moderation.

Zuckerberg and Dorsey also fielded several pointed questions on whether they act as publishers, which the CEOs said they were not.

Upset over the companies’ decision on what to leave on the platform and what to take down, many Republican lawmakers and Trump have threatened to take away protections for internet companies under a federal law called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The law protects companies from being sued over material users post on their platforms.
Slideshow ( 5 images )

Graham also said he hopes Section 230 is changed.

“When you have companies that have the power of government, have far more power than traditional media outlets, something has to give,” he said. President-elect Biden has also said he favors repealing Section 230. Congressional Democrats, however, prefer a more deliberate approach to reforming the law.

Zuckerberg and Dorsey said they would be open to some reforms to the law.

At an October hearing, Twitter’s Dorsey said eroding Section 230 could significantly hurt how people communicate online. Zuckerberg said he supports changing the law but also said tech platforms were likely to censor more to avoid legal risks if the law is repealed.


Since the thread OP requires a point of discussion and an opinion, here you go:

Do you think that social media platforms/publishers have gone too far in attempting to curate, and therefore manipulate and censor user content? Do you think Republicans have the right idea in attempting to repeal Section 230 and guarantee the free speech of social media users not just in America, but around the world? Do you think the Democrats just want to seize complete control of all mainstream and social media and reinvent them as subservient mouthpieces in order to further entrench their already outsize influence because they are simply unable to tolerate any kind of dissent and are quick to delegitimize and slander their opponents as racists, fascists, and white supremacists instead of opting to "kiss and make up" with Republicans and offer an olive branch of compromise and goodwill rather than slide even further into hatred and far-left, cultural and identitarian, political extremism and division?

Do you think the Democrats, via their de facto mouthpieces Facebook and Twitter as well as MSM networks such as CNN and MSNBC attempted to rig the pre-election campaign season in Joe Biden's favor by blocking an NYP article from being shared? Do you think former Bill Clinton advisor and open Democrat George Stephanopoulos should be the chief anchor of ABC News, another Democrat mouthpiece? Do you think the Left is totally obsessed with using social and mainstream media to impose its woke supremacist, far-left imperialist agenda in every country in the world while pretending to stand for press freedom only when they can use it as a political cudgel to bash Trump and Republicans? Do you think their unanimous take-down of NYP makes them total hypocrites who don't actually care about press freedom at all?

Do you think conservative, centrist, and other independent, non-mainstream, political YouTube channels such as China Uncensored and America Uncovered are being arbitrarily shadowbanned, delisted from search suggestions, and demonetized for both monetary and political reasons, forcing them to rely on Patreon, SubscribeStar, and other payment methods to remain afloat? Do you believe this subtle and underhanded attempt to manipulate the political narrative in the Democrats' favor is incredibly self-serving, fundamentally dishonest, and bad for democracy in the long run?

Do you think the Democrats are totally out of control and seem to have lost it completely? Do you that the Democrats must be prevented from implementing their woke, anti-liberal, anti-democratic, anti-Western, authoritarian, anti-free speech policies at all costs? Do you think Republicans absolutely must win the Georgia Senate runoffs on Jan. 5 and put a wrench in the Democrats' plans to curb freedom of speech both online and offline and roll back liberal democracy? Do you think Donald Trump should have won the 2020 Presidential election in a landslide (regardless of whether you believe said election has been "rigged", which I don't believe it has)?


Yes to all of the above. Freedom of expression is an issue that's very close to my heart, especially if it occurs online. The thought of anyone having their account suspended or even deleted simply for tweeting, for instance, All Lives Matter, or Islam is not a religion of peace, or f*** communism, or f*** feminism, while MSM outlets pile on the pressure by further defaming and assassinating one's good character by implying that they are, e.g. a racist and a fascist for criticizing Islam or BLM, and spineless, cowardly employers more obsessed with monetary gain and/or political survival fire said individuals due to said pressure and character assassination, thereby sending a clear message to authoritarian regimes around the world that actually arrest and disappear people for this sort of thing, and in some cases, indirectly aiding and abetting said regimes, is a thought that should horrify any decent human being. The internet must remain as free and unrestricted as humanly possible. Social media censorship and MSM acquiescence to the narrow dictates of a far-left, cultural IdPol agenda must be resisted at all costs.

Freedom of speech is at stake here for social media users around the globe. If the Democrats have their way and they win both Senate runoffs in Georgia, then they, Facebook, Twitter, and Google will have free rein to censor, curate, and block user content like the "newspaper publishers" rather than the platforms they seem to think they are. The Republicans must make a stand here and now or we, as internet users, are fucking screwed.



ModEdit: Poll edited as per this Moderator post: viewtopic.php?p=37964897#p37964897
Last edited by The Archregimancy on Wed Nov 18, 2020 3:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
LIBERATE HONG KONG. REVOLUTION OF OUR TIMES. CCP DELENDA EST.
VIVE LE FRANCE. JE SUIS SAMUEL PATY. I STAND WITH EUROPE AND ISRAEL AGAINST RADICAL ISLAM.
ALL LIVES MATTER.
Wuhan coronavirus is racist but Japanese encephalitis is A-OK. The CCP has nothing to do with this double standard whatsoever. Nothing to see here.
The case against communism
Definition of radical Islam

User avatar
Eukaryotic Cells
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1761
Founded: Aug 10, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Eukaryotic Cells » Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:03 am

Those are some Trump campaign website tier poll options.

User avatar
Nilokeras
Minister
 
Posts: 3298
Founded: Jul 14, 2020
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Nilokeras » Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:07 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:
Do you think that social media platforms/publishers have gone too far in attempting to curate, and therefore manipulate and censor user content? Do you think Republicans have the right idea in attempting to repeal Section 230 and guarantee the free speech of social media users not just in America, but around the world? Do you think the Democrats just want to seize complete control of all mainstream and social media and reinvent them as subservient mouthpieces in order to further entrench their already outsize influence because they are simply unable to tolerate any kind of dissent and are quick to delegitimize and slander their opponents as racists, fascists, and white supremacists instead of opting to "kiss and make up" with Republicans and offer an olive branch of compromise and goodwill rather than slide even further into hatred and far-left, cultural and identitarian, political extremism and division?

Do you think the Democrats, via their de facto mouthpieces Facebook and Twitter as well as MSM networks such as CNN and MSNBC attempted to rig the pre-election campaign season in Joe Biden's favor by blocking an NYP article from being shared? Do you think former Bill Clinton advisor and open Democrat George Stephanopoulos should be the chief anchor of ABC News, another Democrat mouthpiece? Do you think the Left is totally obsessed with using social and mainstream media to impose its woke supremacist, far-left imperialist agenda in every country in the world while pretending to stand for press freedom only when they can use it as a political cudgel to bash Trump and Republicans? Do you think their unanimous take-down of NYP makes them total hypocrites who don't actually care about press freedom at all?

Do you think conservative, centrist, and other independent, non-mainstream, political YouTube channels such as China Uncensored and America Uncovered are being arbitrarily shadowbanned, delisted from search suggestions, and demonetized for both monetary and political reasons, forcing them to rely on Patreon, SubscribeStar, and other payment methods to remain afloat? Do you believe this subtle and underhanded attempt to manipulate the political narrative in the Democrats' favor is incredibly self-serving, fundamentally dishonest, and bad for democracy in the long run?

Do you think the Democrats are totally out of control and seem to have lost it completely? Do you that the Democrats must be prevented from implementing their woke, anti-liberal, anti-democratic, anti-Western, authoritarian, anti-free speech policies at all costs? Do you think Republicans absolutely must win the Georgia Senate runoffs on Jan. 5 and put a wrench in the Democrats' plans to curb freedom of speech both online and offline and roll back liberal democracy? Do you think Donald Trump should have won the 2020 Presidential election in a landslide (regardless of whether you believe said election has been "rigged", which I don't believe it has)?


I propose a new corollary to the old fallacy of the Gish gallop, (where you flood an opponent with too many arguments to tackle at once) the Glorious HK gush: dumping so many leading questions on an opponent that it feels like you're debating a loud party barge floating downstream past you.
Last edited by Nilokeras on Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:09 am, edited 2 times in total.
Voted number one terrorist sympathizer, 2023

Experiencing a critical creedance shortage

User avatar
Omniabstracta
Diplomat
 
Posts: 950
Founded: Mar 24, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Omniabstracta » Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:10 am

This is a pretty ironic topic when you consider just how willing virtually everyone on Capitol Hill—Republicans included—is to pull the trigger on section 230 protections at the same time, which would force social media platforms to be far more strict about how they moderate their content. Yeah this is definitely about “free speech” and definitely not “hey they’re fact checking stuff I like you can’t do that,” mhm, sure.
Last edited by Omniabstracta on Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
"It was golden, purple, violet, gray and blue. It lighted every peak, crevasse and ridge of the nearby mountain range with a clarity and beauty that cannot be described but must be seen to be imagined. It was that beauty that the great poets dream about but describe most poorly and inadequately..."

User avatar
Eukaryotic Cells
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1761
Founded: Aug 10, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Eukaryotic Cells » Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:11 am

To answer your question: If we do make changes to Section 230, we ought to carefully consider the impact of our actions.

1) The software/tech industry is a particularly competitive and dynamic part of the US economy. We should avoid shooting ourselves in the foot on this, if possible.

2) A straight Section 230 repeal is actually likely to lead to less free speech online, not more.

3) Website owners have a valid interest in moderating their platforms. That needs to be balanced against other interests.

User avatar
Eukaryotic Cells
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1761
Founded: Aug 10, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Eukaryotic Cells » Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:18 am

Eukaryotic Cells wrote:To answer your question: If we do make changes to Section 230, we ought to carefully consider the impact of our actions.

1) The software/tech industry is a particularly competitive and dynamic part of the US economy. We should avoid shooting ourselves in the foot on this, if possible.

2) A straight Section 230 repeal is actually likely to lead to less free speech online, not more.

3) Website owners have a valid interest in moderating their platforms. That needs to be balanced against other interests.

I'd also direct you to the Electronic Frontier Foundation if you care deeply about issues like freedom of speech and privacy online.

User avatar
Heloin
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26091
Founded: Mar 30, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Heloin » Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:39 am

Running as a contender for 2020's worst NSG poll I see.

That and your "points of discussion" seem to exist in a separate reality from our own.
Last edited by Heloin on Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Picairn
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8827
Founded: Feb 21, 2020
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Picairn » Wed Nov 18, 2020 1:06 am

Repealing Section 230 would cause a shutdown on social media and forums across the Internet. It's also likely that Americans will be barred from NS to avoid lawsuits.
Picairn's Ministry of Foreign Relations
Minister: Edward H. Cornell
WA Ambassador: John M. Terry (Active)
Factbook | Constitution | Newspaper
Albrenia wrote:With great power comes great mockability.

Proctopeo wrote:I'm completely right and you know it.

Moralityland wrote:big corporations allied with the communist elite
Social democrat, passionate political observer, and naval warfare enthusiast.
Listen here Jack, we're going to destroy malarkey.
♔ The Empire of Picairn ♔
-✯ ✯ ✯ ✯ ✯-—————————-✯ ✯ ✯ ✯ ✯-
Kyrusia's words live on forever!

User avatar
Eukaryotic Cells
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1761
Founded: Aug 10, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Eukaryotic Cells » Wed Nov 18, 2020 1:12 am

Picairn wrote:Repealing Section 230 would cause a shutdown on social media and forums across the Internet. It's also likely that Americans will be barred from NS to avoid lawsuits.

I don't think that a website like Wikipedia could exist without Section 230. Large companies could develop means for coping with certain kinds of Section 230 reform. Small websites and non-profits would be kind of screwed, though.
Last edited by Eukaryotic Cells on Wed Nov 18, 2020 1:19 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Senkaku
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25687
Founded: Sep 01, 2012
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Senkaku » Wed Nov 18, 2020 1:59 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:Do you think that social media platforms/publishers have gone too far in attempting to curate, and therefore manipulate and censor user content?

no
Do you think Republicans have the right idea in attempting to repeal Section 230 and guarantee the free speech of social media users not just in America, but around the world?

no
Do you think the Democrats just want to seize complete control of all mainstream and social media and reinvent them as subservient mouthpieces in order to further entrench their already outsize influence because they are simply unable to tolerate any kind of dissent and are quick to delegitimize and slander their opponents as racists, fascists, and white supremacists instead of opting to "kiss and make up" with Republicans and offer an olive branch of compromise and goodwill rather than slide even further into hatred and far-left, cultural and identitarian, political extremism and division?

not sure, sentence too long, but probably no

Do you think the Democrats, via their de facto mouthpieces Facebook and Twitter as well as MSM networks such as CNN and MSNBC attempted to rig the pre-election campaign season in Joe Biden's favor by blocking an NYP article from being shared?

no

(also, Facebook, noted Democratic mouthpiece? lol)

Do you think former Bill Clinton advisor and open Democrat George Stephanopoulos should be the chief anchor of ABC News, another Democrat mouthpiece?

He hasn't taken his dick out on a Zoom call or in person in the office afaik and these days that's good enough for me
Do you think the Left is totally obsessed with using social and mainstream media to impose its woke supremacist, far-left imperialist agenda in every country in the world while pretending to stand for press freedom only when they can use it as a political cudgel to bash Trump and Republicans?

no
Do you think their unanimous take-down of NYP makes them total hypocrites who don't actually care about press freedom at all?

confused who the "they" you're talking abt is at this pt

Do you think conservative, centrist, and other independent, non-mainstream, political YouTube channels such as China Uncensored and America Uncovered are being arbitrarily shadowbanned, delisted from search suggestions, and demonetized for both monetary and political reasons, forcing them to rely on Patreon, SubscribeStar, and other payment methods to remain afloat?

not arbitrarily, no (also calling Epoch News/New Tang Dynasty Television outlets "centrist" is hilarious)
Do you believe this subtle and underhanded attempt to manipulate the political narrative in the Democrats' favor is incredibly self-serving, fundamentally dishonest, and bad for democracy in the long run?

no

Do you think the Democrats are totally out of control and seem to have lost it completely?

no, and apparently neither does the American electorate lol
Do you that the Democrats must be prevented from implementing their woke, anti-liberal, anti-democratic, anti-Western, authoritarian, anti-free speech policies at all costs?

do you that
Do you think Republicans absolutely must win the Georgia Senate runoffs on Jan. 5 and put a wrench in the Democrats' plans to curb freedom of speech both online and offline and roll back liberal democracy?

no, I hope Kelly Loeffler gets her insider trading ass handed to her in a Mario's shopping bag
Do you think Donald Trump should have won the 2020 Presidential election in a landslide (regardless of whether you believe said election has been "rigged", which I don't believe it has)?

no

Yes to all of the above.

thanks for breaking the suspense for us lmao
Freedom of expression is an issue that's very close to my heart, especially if it occurs online. The thought of anyone having their account suspended or even deleted simply for tweeting, for instance, All Lives Matter, or Islam is not a religion of peace, or f*** communism, or f*** feminism,

methinks someone just wants to say things that are banned on here too lol
while MSM outlets pile on the pressure by further defaming and assassinating one's good character by implying that they are, e.g. a racist and a fascist for criticizing Islam or BLM, and spineless, cowardly employers more obsessed with monetary gain and/or political survival fire said individuals due to said pressure and character assassination, thereby sending a clear message to authoritarian regimes around the world that actually arrest and disappear people for this sort of thing, and in some cases, indirectly aiding and abetting said regimes, is a thought that should horrify any decent human being. The internet must remain as free and unrestricted as humanly possible. Social media censorship and MSM acquiescence to the narrow dictates of a far-left, cultural IdPol agenda must be resisted at all costs.

Freedom of speech is at stake here for social media users around the globe. If the Democrats have their way and they win both Senate runoffs in Georgia, then they, Facebook, Twitter, and Google will have free rein to censor, curate, and block user content like the "newspaper publishers" rather than the platforms they seem to think they are. The Republicans must make a stand here and now or we, as internet users, are fucking screwed.

NSG's very own knockoff Ian Miles Cheong once again serving up a delightful far-right mixture of rage, hysteria, disinformation, leading questions, and totally incoherent nonsense... you simply love to see it
agreed honey. send bees

User avatar
Nobel Hobos 2
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14114
Founded: Dec 04, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Nobel Hobos 2 » Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:25 am

Ah, it's the Most Important Issue of 2020 again! Great!

I have a lot to add to my previous comments. Not.
I report offenses if and only if they are crimes.
No footwear industry: citizens cannot afford new shoes.
High rate of Nobel prizes and other academic achievements.

User avatar
The Archregimancy
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29254
Founded: Aug 01, 2005
Democratic Socialists

Postby The Archregimancy » Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:27 am

Glorious Hong Kong, while your OP adheres to site rules, your thread poll is far too close to flamebaiting/trollbaiting for comfort.

Please change it to something less forcefully phrased.

I'll give you roughly 30 minutes to do this yourself, otherwise I'll intervene and either change it unilaterally or delete it completely.

Thank you.
Last edited by The Archregimancy on Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kowani
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44696
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:29 am

This OP is more loaded than a stuffed sandwich.
Abolitionism in the North has leagued itself with Radical Democracy, and so the Slave Power was forced to ally itself with the Money Power; that is the great fact of the age.




The triumph of the Democracy is essential to the struggle of popular liberty


Currently Rehabilitating: Martin Van Buren, Benjamin Harrison, and Woodrow Wilson
Currently Vilifying: George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, and Jimmy Carter

User avatar
Drongonia
Minister
 
Posts: 3147
Founded: Feb 11, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Drongonia » Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:29 am

Social media should be nationalised, free-market capitalism is cringe and has created yet another monster that is working against the interests of the people.

User avatar
The Archregimancy
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29254
Founded: Aug 01, 2005
Democratic Socialists

Postby The Archregimancy » Wed Nov 18, 2020 3:04 am

The Archregimancy wrote:Glorious Hong Kong, while your OP adheres to site rules, your thread poll is far too close to flamebaiting/trollbaiting for comfort.

Please change it to something less forcefully phrased.

I'll give you roughly 30 minutes to do this yourself, otherwise I'll intervene and either change it unilaterally or delete it completely.

Thank you.



I have now edited the poll.

I kept the 'yes' and 'no' options; I simply deleted the baiting editorial comment after those options.

User avatar
Freiheit Reich
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5510
Founded: May 27, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Freiheit Reich » Wed Nov 18, 2020 4:46 am

Social media websites should have the right to be biased just as China Daily is biased. The best thing to do is create a competing website that has fair media standards and force Facebook and Twitter to improve themselves because they will see the alternate websites taking away their business. I don't think it is that hard to make a social media website, it is surprising there are not more.

Facebook and Twitter are jokes and this is one reason I don't have accounts with these platforms.
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: 3.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.87

User avatar
Freiheit Reich
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5510
Founded: May 27, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Freiheit Reich » Wed Nov 18, 2020 4:48 am

Drongonia wrote:Social media should be nationalised, free-market capitalism is cringe and has created yet another monster that is working against the interests of the people.


This is very dangerous and will create a situation similar to what is happening in Red China now. Even Winnie the Pooh is not welcome on social media websites.

Why China censors banned Winnie the Pooh

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40627855
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: 3.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.87

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 126532
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Libertarian Police State

Postby Ethel mermania » Wed Nov 18, 2020 4:51 am

Omniabstracta wrote:This is a pretty ironic topic when you consider just how willing virtually everyone on Capitol Hill—Republicans included—is to pull the trigger on section 230 protections at the same time, which would force social media platforms to be far more strict about how they moderate their content. Yeah this is definitely about “free speech” and definitely not “hey they’re fact checking stuff I like you can’t do that,” mhm, sure.


I do agree that there is great irony in what the republican side is saying as the poster quoted says, these folks have been the most vocal opponents of free speech in congress. The thing is though now that they have been burnt with it, they now see the light. And traditional free speech groups like the ACLU have completely abandoned the issue and gone over to the censorship for social justice side.

As one who like free speech, the remedy is not civil right now but legislative. The internet needs to become a "common carrier", much like the American rail roads after the civil war, where all speech (short of direct incitement), needs to be allowed. Which means less liability for the carriers of the content (like face book), and back on the producers of it, which would still fall under libel and other laws.
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

The most fundamental problem of politics is not the control of wickedness but the limitation of righteousness. 



http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
Drongonia
Minister
 
Posts: 3147
Founded: Feb 11, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Drongonia » Wed Nov 18, 2020 5:00 am

Freiheit Reich wrote:Social media websites should have the right to be biased just as China Daily is biased. The best thing to do is create a competing website that has fair media standards and force Facebook and Twitter to improve themselves because they will see the alternate websites taking away their business. I don't think it is that hard to make a social media website, it is surprising there are not more.

Facebook and Twitter are jokes and this is one reason I don't have accounts with these platforms.

"Create a new platform!"
>Platform's webhost is immediately lobbied and it's taken offline, forced onto a slower hosting service
>Lobby all major payment processors to stop the site taking donations
>Site is slandered in the mainstream media and normal social networks
>Major search engines derank the site to stop people using it
>Media continues to slander by saying stuff like "x site is a neo-y haven!" and "all x users are y!"
>Be Bitchute, Gab, Minds and recently DLive
Last edited by Drongonia on Wed Nov 18, 2020 5:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Resilient Acceleration
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1139
Founded: Sep 23, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Resilient Acceleration » Wed Nov 18, 2020 5:15 am

Do you think the Democrats, via their de facto mouthpieces Facebook

Uhh I might have some news.
Last edited by Resilient Acceleration on Wed Nov 18, 2020 5:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

2033.12.21
 TLDR News | Exclusive: GLOBAL DRONE CRISIS! "Hyper-advanced" Chinese military AI design leaked online by unknown groups, Pres. Yang issues warning of "major outbreak of 3D-printed drone swarm terrorist attacks to US civilians and assets" | Secretary Pasca to expand surveillance on all financial activities through pattern recognition AI to curb the supply chain of QAnon and other domestic terror grassroots

A near-future scenario where transhumanist tech barons and their ruthless capitalism are trying to save the planet, emphasis on "try" | Resilient Accelerationism in a nutshell | OOC

User avatar
Nobel Hobos 2
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14114
Founded: Dec 04, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Nobel Hobos 2 » Wed Nov 18, 2020 5:41 am

Freiheit Reich wrote:Social media websites should have the right to be biased just as China Daily is biased. The best thing to do is create a competing website that has fair media standards and force Facebook and Twitter to improve themselves because they will see the alternate websites taking away their business.


Assuming these "platform" businesses are just ordinary businesses will lead you into error. Though it's not clearly defined what part of the market each cover (and the two clearly overlap) you can firm that up by thinking of a core market for each.

In those terms, in that core area, each are monopolies. It's in the nature of the business that (almost) everyone wants to use the service with the most other users. Going into a server with no other customers, is like going into a shop with nothing for sale and no shopkeeper. You might like the decor but you won't hang around.

So the suggested competitor starts off with ... no, not all right-wingers. They have other places that aren't as public, if they just want to hang out with people who agree with them. No, your competing service starts off with only those people who have been banned from Facebook or Twitter, so it's your right-wingers, some spammers and flamers of no particular political alignment, and a bunch of pedos and stalkers.

If you have a business plan from there, which gets you at least to 50% of all available users, well don't tell us about it. Found a company and start looking for investors.

I don't think it is that hard to make a social media website, it is surprising there are not more.


Don't be surprised. Be thoughtful.
I report offenses if and only if they are crimes.
No footwear industry: citizens cannot afford new shoes.
High rate of Nobel prizes and other academic achievements.

User avatar
Terruana
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1959
Founded: Nov 18, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Terruana » Wed Nov 18, 2020 5:48 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:
Do you think that social media platforms/publishers have gone too far in attempting to curate, and therefore manipulate and censor user content? Do you think Republicans have the right idea in attempting to repeal Section 230 and guarantee the free speech of social media users not just in America, but around the world? Do you think the Democrats just want to seize complete control of all mainstream and social media and reinvent them as subservient mouthpieces in order to further entrench their already outsize influence because they are simply unable to tolerate any kind of dissent and are quick to delegitimize and slander their opponents as racists, fascists, and white supremacists instead of opting to "kiss and make up" with Republicans and offer an olive branch of compromise and goodwill rather than slide even further into hatred and far-left, cultural and identitarian, political extremism and division?

Do you think the Democrats, via their de facto mouthpieces Facebook and Twitter as well as MSM networks such as CNN and MSNBC attempted to rig the pre-election campaign season in Joe Biden's favor by blocking an NYP article from being shared? Do you think former Bill Clinton advisor and open Democrat George Stephanopoulos should be the chief anchor of ABC News, another Democrat mouthpiece? Do you think the Left is totally obsessed with using social and mainstream media to impose its woke supremacist, far-left imperialist agenda in every country in the world while pretending to stand for press freedom only when they can use it as a political cudgel to bash Trump and Republicans? Do you think their unanimous take-down of NYP makes them total hypocrites who don't actually care about press freedom at all?

Do you think conservative, centrist, and other independent, non-mainstream, political YouTube channels such as China Uncensored and America Uncovered are being arbitrarily shadowbanned, delisted from search suggestions, and demonetized for both monetary and political reasons, forcing them to rely on Patreon, SubscribeStar, and other payment methods to remain afloat? Do you believe this subtle and underhanded attempt to manipulate the political narrative in the Democrats' favor is incredibly self-serving, fundamentally dishonest, and bad for democracy in the long run?

Do you think the Democrats are totally out of control and seem to have lost it completely? Do you that the Democrats must be prevented from implementing their woke, anti-liberal, anti-democratic, anti-Western, authoritarian, anti-free speech policies at all costs? Do you think Republicans absolutely must win the Georgia Senate runoffs on Jan. 5 and put a wrench in the Democrats' plans to curb freedom of speech both online and offline and roll back liberal democracy? Do you think Donald Trump should have won the 2020 Presidential election in a landslide (regardless of whether you believe said election has been "rigged", which I don't believe it has)?


Nope, but then it’s hard to take your questions seriously when you phrase them like that.

Personally, I think the topic of social media moderation and the free speech vs misinformation debate is more complicated than “republicans good, democrats bad” or vice versa.

My opinion is that I don’t believe you have presented enough evidence to prove that democrats are controlling and manipulating mainstream media or social media, or that there is an anti-right wing bias in either of these. Yes, some media companies have a clear political bias, but that’s hardly unique to either end of the political spectrum.
I also think you’ve focused solely on the impact of censoring disputed facts/news, and completely neglected to consider the significance of widespread misinformation being shared without moderation through huge social media platforms, and the potential impact this could have on democracy. This is especially important when you consider the unprecedented anonymity offered by moving political discourse online.

Overall, your post just kinda makes me think your account is satirical :?
Political Compass Score:
Economic Left/Right: -6.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.15

User avatar
Freiheit Reich
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5510
Founded: May 27, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Freiheit Reich » Wed Nov 18, 2020 5:59 am

Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
Freiheit Reich wrote:Social media websites should have the right to be biased just as China Daily is biased. The best thing to do is create a competing website that has fair media standards and force Facebook and Twitter to improve themselves because they will see the alternate websites taking away their business.


Assuming these "platform" businesses are just ordinary businesses will lead you into error. Though it's not clearly defined what part of the market each cover (and the two clearly overlap) you can firm that up by thinking of a core market for each.

In those terms, in that core area, each are monopolies. It's in the nature of the business that (almost) everyone wants to use the service with the most other users. Going into a server with no other customers, is like going into a shop with nothing for sale and no shopkeeper. You might like the decor but you won't hang around.

So the suggested competitor starts off with ... no, not all right-wingers. They have other places that aren't as public, if they just want to hang out with people who agree with them. No, your competing service starts off with only those people who have been banned from Facebook or Twitter, so it's your right-wingers, some spammers and flamers of no particular political alignment, and a bunch of pedos and stalkers.

If you have a business plan from there, which gets you at least to 50% of all available users, well don't tell us about it. Found a company and start looking for investors.

I don't think it is that hard to make a social media website, it is surprising there are not more.


Don't be surprised. Be thoughtful.


Facebook is a big moneymaker and big money tends to attract competitors. A company just has to mention its benefits and how it values free speech and privacy. It will start small and then could grow and overtake Facebook. Facebook started with only a few users and then eventually passed Myspace. Why can't another company pass Facebook or at least become a strong alternative? Most companies start small and slowly grow through word-of-mouth and good reviews from journalists.

Facebook isn't the only choice. In China, most people use wechat or QQ (both of them are heavily restricted by the Chinese govt. but it shows there are popular alternatives). I have never tried these alternatives but I am sure not all their users are very political and/or crazy.

What are the best alternatives to Facebook?

https://www.ionos.com/digitalguide/onli ... ernatives/

7 Best Facebook Alternatives That Keep Your Data Private | 2020 Edition

https://www.rankred.com/best-facebook-alternatives/
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: 3.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.87

User avatar
Nobel Hobos 2
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14114
Founded: Dec 04, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Nobel Hobos 2 » Wed Nov 18, 2020 6:11 am

Freiheit Reich wrote:
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
Assuming these "platform" businesses are just ordinary businesses will lead you into error. Though it's not clearly defined what part of the market each cover (and the two clearly overlap) you can firm that up by thinking of a core market for each.

In those terms, in that core area, each are monopolies. It's in the nature of the business that (almost) everyone wants to use the service with the most other users. Going into a server with no other customers, is like going into a shop with nothing for sale and no shopkeeper. You might like the decor but you won't hang around.

So the suggested competitor starts off with ... no, not all right-wingers. They have other places that aren't as public, if they just want to hang out with people who agree with them. No, your competing service starts off with only those people who have been banned from Facebook or Twitter, so it's your right-wingers, some spammers and flamers of no particular political alignment, and a bunch of pedos and stalkers.

If you have a business plan from there, which gets you at least to 50% of all available users, well don't tell us about it. Found a company and start looking for investors.



Don't be surprised. Be thoughtful.


Facebook is a big moneymaker and big money tends to attract competitors. A company just has to mention its benefits and how it values free speech and privacy. It will start small and then could grow and overtake Facebook. Facebook started with only a few users and then eventually passed Myspace. Why can't another company pass Facebook or at least become a strong alternative? Most companies start small and slowly grow through word-of-mouth and good reviews from journalists.

Facebook isn't the only choice. In China, most people use wechat or QQ (both of them are heavily restricted by the Chinese govt. but it shows there are popular alternatives). I have never tried these alternatives but I am sure not all their users are very political and/or crazy.

What are the best alternatives to Facebook?

https://www.ionos.com/digitalguide/onli ... ernatives/

7 Best Facebook Alternatives That Keep Your Data Private | 2020 Edition

https://www.rankred.com/best-facebook-alternatives/


Listen. Natural monopoly. If you want Facebook's users, you'll have to offer some distinctly different experience AND discover new users who aren't interested in Facebook for some reason.

"Different but with less censorship" will not cut it. If it was that easy, you could point to a competitor besides (predecessor) Myspace or services that are primarily in Chinese.

Your idea of "starting small and becoming the biggest" is nothing more than a romantic fantasy about how you're going to lose your first million!
I report offenses if and only if they are crimes.
No footwear industry: citizens cannot afford new shoes.
High rate of Nobel prizes and other academic achievements.

User avatar
Rusozak
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5991
Founded: Jun 14, 2015
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Rusozak » Wed Nov 18, 2020 7:14 am

Social media companies are not the government. It's not censorship for them to ban people for violating their terms of use any more than a store's "No shirt no shoes no service" policy. You have a right to free speech. You don't have a right to a particular privately owned medium to express it.
NOTE: This nation's government style, policies, and opinions in roleplay or forum 7 does not represent my true beliefs. It is purely for the enjoyment of the game.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Achan, Duvniask, Grinning Dragon, Kenmoria, Neu California, Umeria, Valrifall

Advertisement

Remove ads