|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: teknix]
#27258793 - 03/18/21 11:55 AM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
unfortunately prevention of outright lies, that masquerade as friendly truths, is not the same as promoting free speech.
in the context of a man standing on a box 200 years ago in a market yelling out whatever, yes, he has the right. And those who hear him and see him can simply avoid him and tell their friends what a nut he is.
that is free speech.
publishing porn and releasing it as porn in porn stores also is free speech, although it may be connected to sex slavery and has clear moral issues, it is free speech.
Using social media, which is a targeted platform, in order to spread political lies, is not the same thing as the open market with a nut yelling about the end of the world, or an obscure adult only portal for porn.
social media insinuates itself as YOUR portal, your news stream about what you care about.
In this case messages with lies intentionally manifest as impersonation of an honest friend's conversation; the originators of these lies have paid (targeting costs money) for the privilege of filling your private in box, and spreading mental discord. It is paid advertising, often appearing as casual news.
This is very far from the realm of free speech protection which lets us read Allen Ginsburg if we want. Instead it is the whitewashing of expensive and critically manipulative information wars.
This needs to be laid bare and exposed for what it is - naked political bullying, and if you follow the money, it is greed and criminal intent.
I do not condone censorship, but neither do I tolerate propaganda.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
Lion
Decadent Flower Magnate


Registered: 09/20/05
Posts: 8,775
Last seen: 1 day, 17 hours
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: redgreenvines] 1
#27259148 - 03/18/21 03:40 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said:
I do not condone censorship, but neither do I tolerate propaganda.
In that case, ban all social media platforms. They are all battlegrounds for propaganda and they always will be. The only question is whether a variety of propaganda will be tolerated and users, who use the platforms voluntarily, will be trusted to use their discernment; or whether all the propaganda will emanate from tightly regulated sources, i.e. from corporate media, central governments, and tech companies, an alliance of extremely powerful entities coming together to curate reality on behalf of the benighted plebians.
-------------------- βStrengthened by contemplation and study, I will not fear my passions like a coward. My body I will give to pleasures, to diversions that Iβve dreamed of, to the most daring erotic desires, to the lustful impulses of my blood, without any fear at all, for whenever I willβ and I will have the will, strengthened as Iβll be with contemplation and studyβ at the crucial moments Iβll recover my spirit as was before: ascetic.β
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: Lion]
#27259227 - 03/18/21 04:39 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I use this https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ at least once per day
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 1 month, 15 days
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: I use this https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ at least once per day
The government has investigated itself and has found its done nothing wrong!
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of oneβs ignorance." β Confucius
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
Lion really nailed it there. Also if it isn't Social Media, it's Mass Media, or Church, or School, or Super bowl Ads, or whatever else is available, but Social Media would sort of level the playing field to an extent if there is 1st amendment protections. We can't change that people susceptible to manipulation will be manipulated, it's happened for thousands of years, but we can protect our rights to voice our opinions by modern means, in a civil nature of course.
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 1 month, 15 days
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: Lion]
#27259726 - 03/18/21 11:41 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Lion said:
Quote:
redgreenvines said:
I do not condone censorship, but neither do I tolerate propaganda.
In that case, ban all social media platforms. They are all battlegrounds for propaganda and they always will be. The only question is whether a variety of propaganda will be tolerated and users, who use the platforms voluntarily, will be trusted to use their discernment; or whether all the propaganda will emanate from tightly regulated sources, i.e. from corporate media, central governments, and tech companies, an alliance of extremely powerful entities coming together to curate reality on behalf of the benighted plebians.
No idea how I missed this post. 10/10!
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of oneβs ignorance." β Confucius
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
|
you seem to be conspiracy theorists yourselves, I will have to keep that in mind, somehow, vaguely, perhaps.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
I might be of sort, I don't discount a hypothesis that contains some evidence just because it's labeled as a "Conspiracy Theory". UFO cover-up was once a conspiracy theory too . . .
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/harry-reid-ufo-coverup_n_5f83eebcc5b62f97bac4c023
Here's something for the crawlers; Bilderberg Group, Illuminati, Deep State.
That being said:
Quote:
redgreenvines said: you seem to be conspiracy theorists yourselves, I will have to keep that in mind, somehow, vaguely, perhaps.
Does little to aid your argument is is more akin to an ad hominem.
(Remember to address the argument rather than making accusations against the person or people giving the argument)
:P
Edited by teknix (03/19/21 07:30 AM)
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: teknix]
#27260142 - 03/19/21 09:40 AM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
not all conspiracies are equal. nor are they all deliberately placed to cause divisiveness. people collaborate all the time, and sometimes what they collaborate on is conspiratorial, and sometimes that is a good thing.
the worst is when you have outright fallacious dangerous conspiracies such as those that cause people to fear vaccines, or to follow a racist's dogma because they think the opponent eats babies.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
Lion
Decadent Flower Magnate


Registered: 09/20/05
Posts: 8,775
Last seen: 1 day, 17 hours
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: not all conspiracies are equal. nor are they all deliberately placed to cause divisiveness. people collaborate all the time, and sometimes what they collaborate on is conspiratorial, and sometimes that is a good thing.
the worst is when you have outright fallacious dangerous conspiracies such as those that cause people to fear vaccines, or to follow a racist's dogma because they think the opponent eats babies.
I think that's a fair point, but I think you are envisioning that divisiveness is coming from one side, i.e. the Trump-adjacent right.
In reality, on these platforms people are subjected to the divide and conquer tactics of many powerful entities, including US intelligence agencies, foreign intelligence operations, corporate media who want to maintain a monopoly on the narrative, and many other bad actors - from radical, genocidal nationalists to sheer grifters who will propagandize in whatever direction the wind blows. Once you start addressing one group of bad actors with special measures, while allowing others to flourish, you increase paranoia and mistrust.
Things like QAnon are bad and damaging, but they're made worse by making people who are curious about QAnon and many related conspiracy theories feel they're being persecuted through the collaborative efforts of big tech and the US government. For example, there was lots of objective evidence for irregularity in US elections. That doesn't mean the election was stolen, but the heavy hand that tech and traditional media took to crush that narrative helps bring about a Jan. 6 event. They have taken the attitude - and this extends to covid as well, despite how many things mainstream institutions have gotten utterly and laughably wrong about it - that stakes are too high in every major policy area for plebs with dissident views, and figures and platforms that represent their views, to be allowed any platform to express their concerns.
It's also just factually true that lots of people are being purged from social media networks who are not conspiracy theorists, but who tend to focus on actually powerful entities - the US government and military-industrial complex, corporate media, Silicon Valley, and Wall Street - instead of on role playing fantasy culture war groups that have no power but make convenient excuses for broadening the surveillance state. I mean, Twitter literally purged hundreds of accounts for promoting narratives that undermine trust in NATO...
You can see also that traditional media has set its sights on platforms like Substack that don't filter every piece they allow to be published through the DC liberal-left orthodoxy. They want such platforms destroyed because it's in their interest to have a monopoly on the narrative. And they are also the servants of American imperial power. So there is reason to be alarmed by the direction things are heading with regards to censorship and attempts to monopolize propaganda.
-------------------- βStrengthened by contemplation and study, I will not fear my passions like a coward. My body I will give to pleasures, to diversions that Iβve dreamed of, to the most daring erotic desires, to the lustful impulses of my blood, without any fear at all, for whenever I willβ and I will have the will, strengthened as Iβll be with contemplation and studyβ at the crucial moments Iβll recover my spirit as was before: ascetic.β
Edited by Lion (03/19/21 10:21 AM)
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: Lion]
#27260272 - 03/19/21 11:10 AM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
let's call the censorship moderation, because that is what it is in social media. it happens here too. if a poster becomes to zealous about a harmful idea, we notify the moderator. this works, and it often comes with a bit of a user flagging that could end up leading to suspension of the privileges that others enjoy sharing on the board.
this is sustainable. although this is a small board and specifically oriented to shrooms and related issues.
twitter and facebook are much larger scaled beasts, eclipsing the traditional press and a new model has to form which can flag posts and contain or suppress offenders of "the policy".
We have not yet settled on what policy is most appropriate for Twitter and Facebook, both of which I am not an active member, but also we have to be honest about what constitutes terrorism; what is insurrection; what is seriously dangerous health misinformation; and what constitutes hate speech.
I think that any health misinformation should be choked to the extreme, and perpetrators should be cut off of social media privileges for a year minimum and longer if they repeat.
insurrection - 5 years makes some sense
terrorism - 20 years
hate crimes - from 6 months to permanent banning depending on severity and intent.
all of them depends on severity and intent, but one must be aware that a joke, which may imply no intent, can lead to followers committing terrible crimes, so each case has to be considered individually.
We desperately need policies that permit free speech and therefore allow problems to arise, but we need to deal with problems swiftly and intelligently, and that is what has to be legislated. sooner than later.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
|
by the way - I want to choke Gwyneth Paltrow off all platforms asap for bad medical activism.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
What about the far reaching ramifications? Sure, for now you might call it moderation, but how would you know when the moderation extends to censorship (in your view) when there is no other source from which to receive that information? Without venturing into conspiracies, Mass Media News is non interactive and reports what it decides to report, and is pretty centralized.
I'm sure you are familiar with Orwell's dystopia.
Edited by teknix (03/19/21 12:12 PM)
|
Lion
Decadent Flower Magnate


Registered: 09/20/05
Posts: 8,775
Last seen: 1 day, 17 hours
|
|
This is probably too big a debate for me to approach here, but I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I think the problem of creeping oligarchic totalitarianism is bigger than the problem of conspiracy theories.
Also, if there were to be serious repercussions for covid health information, most of the US government, public health officials, Fauci, etc would all be banned from having a platform. They have gotten almost nothing right and caused untold damage, but that's for another thread. But look at this twitter page for an idea of how badly messaging was managed at the outset - this stuff is as responsible or more for less than ideal public response as any right wing propaganda:
https://mobile.twitter.com/YearCovid
-------------------- βStrengthened by contemplation and study, I will not fear my passions like a coward. My body I will give to pleasures, to diversions that Iβve dreamed of, to the most daring erotic desires, to the lustful impulses of my blood, without any fear at all, for whenever I willβ and I will have the will, strengthened as Iβll be with contemplation and studyβ at the crucial moments Iβll recover my spirit as was before: ascetic.β
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: Lion]
#27260350 - 03/19/21 11:59 AM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
It's easy, Give them all Darwin awards. And humanity evolved . . . .
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: teknix]
#27260387 - 03/19/21 12:30 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
teknix said: What about the far reaching ramifications? Sure, for now you might call it moderation, but how would you know when the moderation extends to censorship (in your view) when there is no other source from which to receive that information? Without venturing into conspiracies, Mass Media News is non interactive and reports what it decides to report, and is pretty centralized.
I'm sure you are familiar with Orwell's dystopia.
I don't want you to be overwhelmed by having to defend your positions from many angles at the same time tho, so I'll take a break for abit from this thread.
when we can no longer find and read books from other places and times. - some books however should be released with guidance bound to it such as "Mein Kampf" - which should remain available but bound with the holocaust history, and fake science books should remain available bound with disclaimers and recommended references that clarify how the ideas are wrong. when we have thought control devices attached to our bodies - that punish us for bad thinking (which is at least 1/4 of all thinking) when we are prevented from recording our own thoughts and ideas for our own memory (in app censorship for diarists and authors) when we are prevented from voting for any reason (I don't see democrats doing this) when we are not allowed to photograph what is happening around us.
there are extremes that are completely wrong, and some galling half way measures that almost make sense eg. I had a building on a laneway, and it was constantly being covered by graffiti and the city kept sending me notices that they would remove it and charge me if I did not clean it off. I repainted that wall 3 times a year for 13 years. At one point I painted large figures of women modeling fashion to go with the store on the ground floor. still they sent me notices. Later the spot was hit by a famous graffiteur ANSER - https://torontoist.com/2009/02/tall_poppy_interview_anser/
I got the city to accept it as art - so as long as I kept the rest of the wall clear no problem - and that lasted for a couple of years but then it was totally graffitied over by people of no respect.
so there you have it, a no-graffiti policy that can have appeals that work for a while.
sorry for the digression. it is a matter of enforcing policies of expression that make sense in public, and that is the thing, we are individuals but we together are the public. it is a dynamic not a flat mechanism.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: let's call the censorship moderation, because that is what it is in social media. it happens here too.
I disagree that censorship is moderation in social media. Moderation should be used only to facilitate civil discourse. (Not for suppression) Making social media accountable for their actions would go a long ways, as of now, they can pretty much do what they see fit, and that is probably whatever will be most profitable for the time being. If users use it to break the law, well, they have to deal with the law enforcement. The Social Media platforms are already not accountable (by law, but perhaps to investors) for what people say on their platform.
Quote:
redgreenvines said: if a poster becomes to zealous about a harmful idea, we notify the moderator. this works, and it often comes with a bit of a user flagging that could end up leading to suspension of the privileges that others enjoy sharing on the board.
Sure no problem, doesn't do much to aid civil discourse nor does it effect it really. Shroomery moderates, and facilitates free speech, within reason, (most of the time) but I think that is what is intended, but I'm sure moderation powers have been abused in the past. Also the shroomery isn't publicly traded so it wouldn't fit into my definition in what qualifies as a "Social Media Public Forums"
Quote:
redgreenvines said:
twitter and facebook are much larger scaled beasts, eclipsing the traditional press and a new model has to form which can flag posts and contain or suppress offenders of "the policy".
It has been settled if the existing LAWS that govern and protect speech rather then policy or whims. Users have the ability to block other users, so they can moderate it themselves. Give them an option to only accept replies from verified accounts if they are worried about people circumventing blocks. If they want to extend their fact checking, that's fine too! If Trump is staging an insurrection, let law enforcement officials deal with it rather than the Social Media outlet.
If people want to challenge the status quo, well, that's why we have our rights. To do so if necessary.
Quote:
redgreenvines said: when we can no longer find and read books from other places and times. - some books however should be released with guidance bound to it such as "Mein Kampf" - which should remain available but bound with the holocaust history, and fake science books should remain available bound with disclaimers and recommended references that clarify how the ideas are wrong. when we have thought control devices attached to our bodies - that punish us for bad thinking (which is at least 1/4 of all thinking) when we are prevented from recording our own thoughts and ideas for our own memory (in app censorship for diarists and authors) when we are prevented from voting for any reason (I don't see democrats doing this) when we are not allowed to photograph what is happening around us.
By the time you would get assimilated into that dystopia it will be far too late to do anything about it. But, still, if humanity was being assimilated into that dystopia, and none was reporting it, and everything about it was being censored, how would you know it was happening? (Perhaps a small town in Missouri was just assimilated!) There is technically nothing stopping any social or mass media from censoring or failing to report whatever they want. (aside from competition, which monopolization would circumvent) (I know it is a silly hypothetical, but it does follow the premise and alludes to what could stem from failing to fight for our rights)
Quote:
redgreenvines said: As far as speech goes,
there are extremes that are completely wrong, and some galling half way measures that almost make sense eg. I had a building on a laneway, and it was constantly being covered by graffiti and the city kept sending me notices that they would remove it and charge me if I did not clean it off. I repainted that wall 3 times a year for 13 years. At one point I painted large figures of women modeling fashion to go with the store on the ground floor. still they sent me notices. Later the spot was hit by a famous graffiteur ANSER - https://torontoist.com/2009/02/tall_poppy_interview_anser/
I got the city to accept it as art - so as long as I kept the rest of the wall clear no problem - and that lasted for a couple of years but then it was totally graffitied over by people of no respect.
so there you have it, a no-graffiti policy that can have appeals that work for a while.
sorry for the digression. it is a matter of enforcing policies of expression that make sense in public, and that is the thing, we are individuals but we together are the public. it is a dynamic not a flat mechanism.
Well, that is technically vandalism and against the law. Did you think about putting in a security camera?
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: teknix]
#27260550 - 03/19/21 02:11 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
the security camera would contravene the subsection of the law that states we cannot record video of the laneway which is public space (but we can record our own space, and though the wall was mine, the place to put the camera and the 3-d space that the graffiteur occupies is public - so no go).
I spoke to the police about it and although I can be fined for leaving the wall "dirty" or "unsightly" the vandals would never go to jail or even be fined the amount that repainting the wall would cost. I opted for more paint and brushes and rollers, and saved the electronics and legal costs for a net gain in satisfaction.
even though graffiti is not called free speech, it is an activity that is hardly suppressed, and it really causes no harm, unless it is hateful, and it is quickly remediated with paint.
Taking away Trump's Megaphone however is totally the right thing, and I do hope he never gets it back.
in any case that case is much closer to the moderation we have here, even though the scale is wider.
TRUMP had been warned after valid complaints were made (and people died because of him) and his posting privileges have been withheld. This story is not over yet and it is not one of free speech, it is about abusing the system, and making the system better at self correction.
it is the very essence of moderation, and what is the future of moderation.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
Well, I'd prefer it being a legal matter to be settled in court personally, if what he is doing is wrong then there should be laws against it which he would be prosecuted for. If the FCC wants to limit his speech, like the SEC did to Elon, that would be something different than the actual platform having the power to do what it wants.
RGV, have you tried to bring your plight to the city council? It does seem like there should be a way to resolve the issue in a reasonable manner. There isn't a reasonable expectation of privacy in public, and given the circumstances, you have the right to protect your property, so they need to make an exception to protect your right to do so, I would think. But according to the image link; you are in Canada?
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,703
|
Re: Social Media as Public Forums [Re: teknix]
#27260628 - 03/19/21 02:54 PM (2 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Yes, Pity! I was actually involved as an official of the government (president of the B.I.A which is tax funded and supervised - kind of like a ratepayers group but for a main street (business oriented)), and, thankfully there are limits to the strong arm of the law.
People have to want to be good, you cannot force them to want to respect you or your property.
you can repaint the bad graffiti off, and you can get permission to keep good graffiti. I loved that place but it was too expensive for me to stay there without regular work. We built it from scratch 14 years ago, even had to demolish the previous crappy building, so I was very familiar with the laws and regulations.
Owners & tenants have to pay, graffiti people not so much.
One famous (Trump like person) Mayor of ours, Rob Ford (his brother is now Premier of Ontario - in high school they were dope dealers), even had shares in a graffiti removal company. It was a professional high priced racket with undesirable results. Painting over was better.
Anyway after 13 years we sold it. goodby graffiti.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
|