Are social media platforms that utilize algorithmic feeds inherently anti-free-speech?
In normal discourse, we all have a voice and we all have the choice whether to listen. In the algorithmic space, formulas are used to decide which voices to amplify and also which voices to de-amplify.
Here on Vivaldi Social (Mastodon), I see posts that people I follow post, including posts they choose to boost. No formulas needed. This is, IMHO, the closest to free-speech you can find, although there are some hate speech rules, which is IMHO a good thing. Basically the same as in normal, social discourse.
On Facebook I see posts Facebook thinks I want to see (and boy do they get it wrong), as well as a lot of AI generated nonsense. There are some posts in there that I am interested in, but most are not.
Twitter has turned into amplification of what Elon wants to amplify, mostly hate speech and misinformation. There are still interesting voices in there, but they are harder and harder to find.
What do you think?
#Facebook #Twitter #Mastodon #fediverse #SocialMedia
- Agree (86%, 241 Stimmen)
- Disagree (13%, 38 Stimmen)
stormbringer
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Catweazle
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •@jon, every honest opinion is valid, but not so Fake-news, hate speech and xeno/homophobic propaganda, in where 🤬itter is the worst example, since Musk converted it in a far right wing personal blog.
Same in the newspapers/media, always need to look who pay the ink and always the need to contrast the content.Sadly independent media are currently the minority between ll the manipulated policy propaganda paid by big corporations.
PioneerSketches
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Random Tux User
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •This may be overly pedantic, but I think free speech and the "right to an audience" are two different things. As long as the algorithm does not delete your posts and it can be seen if people look you up, you still have freedom of speech.
To me the right to an audience is not something that is universal. Hate speeches don't deserve an audience to hear it for example. As far as I'm concerned, say what you want, but that doesn't mean people have to hear about it.
Alexandro Lacadena 📷
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Michael Bishop ☕
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Nalyd620
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •brawnybunkbedbuddy
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •as for fb: nowadays i'm checking it briefly every few weeks for new messages and sometimes i glance thru the main feed.
two days ago i saw one general comment from a friend and rest were the "abc is interested in event xyz" posts and then feed abruptly ended displaying message to make new "friends".
every few scrolls they shove up their short clips feature and "interesting pages to follow" box - that one has report feature in 3-dot menu but it's always "broken" (1)
Kevin
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •gorn@蒼象
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Mateusz 🏳️🌈
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •taxet
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •having rules against hate speech is not and has never been anti-free speech, they're in fact vital for actual free speech to flourish. But whatever the hell Musk is doing on his propaganda site definitely is against free speech, because he's currently explicitly doing the thing he claimed past leadership of the site was doing to him and his kind; boosting himself and his friends while deliberately ranking others lower to limit the reach of something he doesn't want other to see.
Technically one could sort of also argue that it's not against free speech because first of all it's a private company that can do pretty much whatever it wants (to an extent I suppose), and secondly because the messages aren't usually specifically deleted. But I do see it as being highly suspicious to say the least.
In any case, the only proper course of action is to dump Twitter, since it's literally the nazi bar now. It's also good to be suspicious of Meta because it has a history of being quite horrible. And also be wary of Bluesky, since something is very much off in that one and it won't be good in a few years, mark my words.
vekkq
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Cyril
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Even tho I agree that algorithm is often annoying, because it tries to force us stay there due to our issues and fomo, I wouldnt say that de-amplifiing is the same as silencing.
Jon S. von Tetzchner
Als Antwort auf Cyril • • •@Erwin_Schroedinger , I guess there is often a combination. Certain voices, typically misinformation and hate speech, is amplified. That is clearly the case on Twitter and Facebook. Other voices are more or less silenced as there is only that much room.
I would like to see the people I follow. I am fine with some ads as well, but other than that, I want to see who I follow. That is what we get here on Mastodon (except the ads).
Cyril
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Well because of the all amplification issues it is enough for me to be annoyed by Twitter just when I try it once in 3 months.
Jon S. von Tetzchner
Als Antwort auf Cyril • • •Cyril
Als Antwort auf Jon S. von Tetzchner • • •Jon S. von Tetzchner
Unbekannter Ursprungsbeitrag • • •Jon S. von Tetzchner
Unbekannter Ursprungsbeitrag • • •