zlacker

[return to "Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content"]
1. firest+H2[view] [source] 2024-08-27 10:29:18
>>southe+(OP)
It is sometimes easy to say in retrospect we shouldn’t have demoted the story. But they did and they trusted the US Administration.

Facebook is international. Do they allow all speech even that which could be viewed as propaganda in the US?

Who makes the ultimate call on whether it be Russian disinformation or COVID-19?

We have tried many different moderation models and not all of them work.

If we try the Reddit route, then we could have incredible bias in moderated communities.

What about fitting the StackOverflow model to social media?

Another route is how X provides for the Community Notes feature. Would that have worked? Is Community Notes still susceptible to the same bias?

◧◩
2. Timber+P3[view] [source] 2024-08-27 10:45:18
>>firest+H2
The shocking answer to this moderation question is not what most people want i.e free speech.
◧◩◪
3. chgs+S6[view] [source] 2024-08-27 11:17:37
>>Timber+P3
Most people don’t want free speech, and no country has free speech anyway.

The question is what limits are made.

◧◩◪◨
4. Timber+6f[view] [source] 2024-08-27 12:30:07
>>chgs+S6
Most people also don't want their opinions to be silenced or used against them either.

As for limits, I think by now we have collected enough data from social media use to know what kinds of posts border on outright immoral and are a negative to society. Some of these have been captured and prohibited by law. It wouldn't be that hard to use the existing laws and norms as a test bed.

But again some people don't want free speech because they are afraid their feelings may be hurt in an exchange. Mostly boils down to that.

[go to top]