Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

"Free Speech" Platforms

When Elon Musk bought 'Twitter', one of the reasons he apparently gave for the purchase was his belief that the platform didn't truly allow free expression. I have no idea if he was correct in his assessment of the service, never having actually used it, but as I understand it from other sources he was just talking out of his proverbial backside.
It was "left-wing" some say, and would impose "strict censorship" of mainstream political views, but something tells me that wasn't the case or, if it was, the incidence of it was exaggerated. I've come across a few "free speech platforms", and my interpretation of this expression is that those sites:
1. Have little, or no (usually no) moderation.
2. Are overrun by trolls, scammers, catfish and other rabble because of the lack of moderation.
3. Allow extremists, literal Nazis who claim that Hitler was a good guy, to spread their odious lies.
Free speech never has, nor will ever be, completely free. There will always be restrictions upon it, simply because [i]there have to be[/i]. Speech, like everything else in life, has consequences. If you, for example, deliberately set out to destroy someone's reputation out of spite, you shouldn't be at all surprised and complain about it if that person hits back. Nor can you make false 000 (emergency) calls, or scream that there's a bomb in a crowded and confined space, like on an aeroplane.
Now, whenever I come across a site that promotes itself this way, as "allowing free speech", I avoid it altogether, because I do not want to be abused for simply disagreeing with someone about something. That's something I don't need in my life, the kind of toxic nonsense that just makes things worse. I don't believe in that kind of "free speech".
Ynotisay · M Best Comment
There's not too many phrases more than "freedom of speech" that drives me nuts. And that's because it's taken on a meaning that has little to do with what it actually is.

Today, "Free Speech" comes out of the mouths of those who want the right to hate speech. To say whatever they want without repercussions. But there are LAWS in place that prevent that.

Freedom of Speech surrounds being able to articulate thoughts without fear of government reprisal. It has ZERO to do with how an organization or outlet moderates content. They can do whatever they want within the confines of the law.

So when you hear that stuff it's always good to consider the source. PARTICULARLY given the fact that those who scream the loudest about "freedom" are also usually the first to want to deny it to those they don't agree with.
@Ynotisay Exactly! Spot on.

plungesponge · 41-45, M
I don't think it's necessarily unrestricted speech that causes a toxic atmosphere, the issue is these platforms create a feed of content and the most toxic posts get recirculated because they have high engagement (of ruining everyone's mood).

Honestly I see the problem as quite easy to fix, now there's chatgpt, it can parse content for toxicity, or these platforms can implement a dislike option that is skewed towards your friend network rather than just being a global rating. That way nobody can get "cancelled" unless it's you're friends who find their content objectionable
SW-User
yeah, you've missed the point lol

Musk was of the view that Twitter allowed free expression to those on the progressive Left, but not to the Right, moderates, or to people with a view or views that are currently being suppressed or cancelled. Some of these views can be very mainstream, but they don't correspond to certain narratives or ideas being promoted by leftist activists, or the leftist media.

He isn't advocating that people have free speech to the degree that they can say anything, and he evidently does believe that Twitter should be moderated.
@SW-User Whose views are being "suppressed" or "cancelled"? I don't know how things are over in the U.S. or Europe (or Asia), but where I live, Australia, no one is being suppressed or "cancelled". Not to my knowledge anyway.
pjgirl · 22-25, F
Messing with the Ukrainians might have been a mistake
plungesponge · 41-45, M
@Ynotisay I'm less familiar with the links to US defense, but my impression was that Starlink had shown it was too expensive to keep providing internet for free and the defence department made an offer to subsidize it. Personally I don't think it was wise to partner with the US military, given the stated purpose was humanitarian, but business-wise I'd understand that Starlink isn't going to do this for free permanently.
pjgirl · 22-25, F
@Ynotisay I think the issue is he took a hand in a situation. I imagine the Israelis would be annoyed if the White House remotely turned off a system and some of their personnel died
Ynotisay · M
@pjgirl He had a hand in the situation the second he got involved with the DoD. For him to make the decision he did as far a turning off the system, speaks to an out of control human being who should NEVER again be allowed to determine the fate of human beings on a whim.
smileylovesgaming · 31-35, F
I remember a few year's ago hearing they deleted thousands of post and profiles. So not really free speech
soulshadow · 36-40, M
He should have sent one of his rockets into twitter instead and saved 20 billion or so.
@soulshadow Well, he's destroying it now, so... he saved on a valuable rocket! 🚀
HumanEarth · 56-60, F
If its free speech

Then why do they save all the messages
Yes, [i]these[/i] days "free speech" usually means not censoring the right. Now the real question is what's going to happen when there's leftist extremism? Will he still abide by his ideals of free speech absolutism (a term I heard from him) or will it be clear that this really means right-friendly censorship?
lumberjackslam · 41-45, M
haven't you noticed the napoleon complexed Nazis scampering around here? we have them just on a smaller scale. also, I noticed that those comments usually go uncriticized.
lumberjackslam · 41-45, M
@LordShadowfire she would not respond to me
@lumberjackslam I just PMed her to ask her about what she said, and she confirmed that's what her opinion is. Now I'm asking her for evidence that are in control of the media, yet allow people to say shit like that on the internet. I'll let you know what she says.
lumberjackslam · 41-45, M
@LordShadowfire that's a new low attacking Holocaust victims and I'm sure it's just the tip of the Iceberg.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment

 
Post Comment