Social media and wrongthink

[Diabeetus]

It's been three months since Alex Jones was kicked off everything. It was a coordinated attack against all the social media accounts of one man for the crime of pushing conspiracy theories.

The martyrdom of Alex Jones marked the moment Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerburg, and Susan Wojcicki doubled down on their political influence. Ever since then, people (even some of us on the Kiwi Farms) have been worried that Internet freedom is going to be poisoned by these righteous knights of Silicon Valley until it is killed.

Discussion about the continuted deplatforming and demonitization of figures on social media has skyrocketed on this website. I think it'd be useful if there was one thread to talk about it and the questions around it.

• Is it okay for a social media website to be ran with a political bias in mind?
• Should certain opinions and words be against Terms Of Service? And if so, where should the line be crossed?
• Do people like Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, and Susan Wojcicki really hate those they target with the rules on their websites? Do they really see them as political opponents? Or are they cogs of a bigger machine?
• Which website has the most power as of now?
• Is it right for an online entertainer to get kicked off their platform for their opinions simply because "They should get a real job"?
• Do people like Andrew Torba have good intentions? Or are they just as insidious as those who run Twitter and Facebook? How do they impact this situation? What is the best thing they can do?

And the most important question(s), in my opinion:

• How can this be fixed?
• What the fuck do we do?
• What would be the perfect social media platform?

Hopefully, this won't devolve into sperging about how Sargon and Milo are fucking worthless braindead scumfuck bastard pile of trash mental dickfaces that should be gunned down in the street like the degenerates they are.

 

[ES 148]

Sargon and Milo are fucking worthless braindead scumfuck bastard pile of trash mental dickcfaces that should be gunned down in the street like the degenerates they are.

 

[IV 445]

First they deplatformed the [people I disagree witb] but I said “good” in a smug way.

 

[dopy]

why should the elite bow to the masses? are they not entitled to their pets the same way we are entitled to ours? should we not be impressed by their arrogance and guile alone, their hunger to direct humanity itself? is that not worth awe in itself?

 

[Not an_ime g_irl]

It's ok to ban someone for posting pictures of someone else without authorization, but it's not ok to ban someone for wrongthink or trolling.
If the users are too immature to just block the content they don't want to see and instead enter big rage-fueled arguments with a troll, the mods should not take it on themselves to "punish the bad guys"

 

[eldri]

"What the fuck do we do?"
Use and abuse them like they do to everyone else but do it better.

 

[Imperialist #348]

now while this might sound nutty, i believe a platform that that enforces this idea of order that tries to stop any kind of different thinking is basically inviting entropy into the mix, so i see it as a natural way of order replacing a forced,unnatural way of order.

and so with this 'fake' order being pushed out of course people who enjoy that facade of order will do anything to maintain it thus leading to more chaos which, depending on your view of the whole thing, is either good or bad.

 

[Graffiti canvas]

• Is it okay for a social media website to be ran with a political bias in mind? - Yes. Just like if you owned and operated a massively popular taco shop in your town, you'd probably want to have the right to not let people plaster campaign signs of someone or something you don't like all over your property. Imagine a bunch of fat cunts showing up and screeching at you that it's their first amendment right to be able to cover your tables with fliers of pro life aborted fetus pictures? It's your taco shop. You make the rules and the first amendment right doesn't apply to businesses.

• Should certain opinions and words be against Terms Of Service? And if so, where should the line be crossed? - Yes, See above. Wherever the fuck you as the owner of your taco shop want that line drawn.

• Is it right for an online entertainer to get kicked off their platform for their opinions simply because "They should get a real job"? - It wasn't "Their" platform. They didn't own it, they signed up for a service from a private business and the private business can boot them off whenever and however they want.

It always amazes me that people forget that facebook, youtube and other social media giants are just basically Wal-Marts of the social media sphere and don't owe anyone shit. They're a business and are free to operate within the boundaries of such entities, including the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

People need to quit thinking facebook and youtube are some sort of entitlement or social service, even if we're dumb enough to use them as such.

 

[Slap47]

People need to quit thinking facebook and youtube are some sort of entitlement or social service, even if we're dumb enough to use them as such.

The spirit of the first amendment is the idea that we should have a society where every idea is given a chance to spread itself.

For any idea or movement to have a chance it simply must have access to the internet. An environment where every payment processor, social media site and network provider is conspiring to silence people is not conducive to that ideal. These sites and providers have basically become natural monopolies and despite the fact that people don't need them to live, they still amount to what is basically a utility due to the aspirations of freedom this society has.


Can't say I'm optimistic about Peterson's idea of having a patreon. Gab basically became socially conservative patreon and fought against "degeneracy" and I suspect Peterson will do the same.

 

[AnOminous]

Can't say I'm optimistic about Peterson's idea of having a patreon. Gab basically became socially conservative patreon and fought against "degeneracy" and I suspect Peterson will do the same.

Why not just have basic services available to all people and if they aren't willing to do that, yank any special privileges they get from the banking system?

Also have a mass beheading of the boards of directors of every credit card company and/or do the last minute of Fight Club on them all.

 

[Stock Image Photographer]

Also have a mass beheading of the boards of directors of every credit card company and/or do the last minute of Fight Club on them all.

Or this: