The age of American unreason

[billvon 2,400]

5 hours ago, RonD1120 said:

Parler

Yep, Parler is a good solution for people who want to stay 100% in the conservative news bubble and never see any factual news at all.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

On 8/29/2020 at 6:51 AM, RonD1120 said:

Parler

lol, ah yes the free speech app with censorship...How am I not surprised you are on there

[JoeWeber 2,299]

On 8/26/2020 at 10:43 PM, Coreece said:

The reasoning was that conservatives are more cohesive and politically aligned.

Not news.

[mbohu 77]

On 8/27/2020 at 9:21 PM, billvon said:

Quote

Asking FB to censor posts will likely backfire tremendously. 
It also puts them into an impossible position. Based on what exactly should they censor posts? If everything that is not completely truthful gets censored, not much will be left--and how do they even research what is truthful and what isn't? Will there be any oversight of that? Right now, you can post all kinds of anti-FB and anti-Zuckerberg stuff right on their platform and it will not be censored. At least this is consistent.

But they are doing that right now.  They are relying on third party fact checkers (Snopes, Politifact, AP Fact Check etc)  They are following their listed Terms of Service and Community Guidelines and seem to get it right most of the time.  They are under no obligation to do so, of course.

Reviving an old post:

I knew there was more to this: So, it's not a question of what FB and others are ABLE (or willing) to do in terms of fact checking or censorship (depending on what you believe, we probably call it fact-checking when it's about stuff we dislike and censorship when it's stuff we like) it's what can they be FORCED to do via lawsuits and threats:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2020/09/11/trump-biden-section-230-big-tech-zw-orig.cnn-business/video/playlists/business-tech/

While this is the one issue that Trump and Biden agree on (not really, though) it's probably something we should be against. And as they correctly mention at the end, it actually will make all these newer alternatives to FB disappear, as they do not have the budget to survive lawsuits or even to have someone check every single post a user may put onto their platform.

I actually think that the compromise that is currently starting to be employed (leaving the content on the platform but posting links to fact checkers or pointing out inaccuracies) is not a completely bad solution.

[Phil1111 911]

On 8/25/2020 at 6:31 PM, billvon said:

....  But what matters is the message!"   "Maybe she didn't say that but you know she would have."  "I posted that for information; I'm not claiming it's 100% true."   "It's what they are all thinking."  "What matters is the formatting, not the numbers in the post!"  (yes, I actually saw that one today.)

It's probably not the first time in history this approach has been taken, but it's definitely the first time I've seen it on display so blatantly.

Well trump and his enablers have an answer.