• @Doomsider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      910 days ago

      The majority of advertising we see in the US should be banned for sure. It is just thinly veiled psychological fuckery designed to manipulate us. Not cool.

    • b1tstrem1st0
      link
      fedilink
      English
      210 days ago

      Agreed. Let everyone be free to decide. I don’t want something shoved to my face 24x7, its inorganic and harmful.

  • @ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2011 days ago

    Censorship or not, tolerance is a social contract, and those who want to undo this system must be stopped by any means possible. Content moderation is actually the compromise.

    • @interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -110 days ago

      Delete the data on my device and let me in control of the sliders and ban words. Make the defaults reasonnable to stop hate. This would not be censorship anymore, just deamplification and no one is a martyr now.

    • Phoenixz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      510 days ago

      Just to put some perspective over here:

      Pretty much the exact same thing in pretty much the exact words is being said on the other (right wing) side of things. Its just the things being tolerated are different

      I honestly think that the bigger issue here isn’t so much tolerance but certain parties that keep pointing out relatively small things to the common people (mostly on the right side of the political spectrum) and go “ooohhg my God can you believe these evil fuckers and they will do that to children too and won’t anyone think of the children”. Basically I’m talking trump, musk, Fox news, that sort of shit.

      I’ve long held the believe that Trump did untold damage and harm to millions, but the biggest harm he has done is the division he’s sown. There has always been a rather steep divide in the US, but that divide has grown into a fucking ocean between the two sides.

      I think most people in the US, when receiving the actual proper facts, would really not think and feel that different. Nobody would rage against universal healthcare, why would they? You only do that when you’re misinformed.

      Not trying to excuse anyone, not trying to say that most trump supporters aren’t insufferable assholes, but the vast majority of them wouldn’t be as bad had they have access to actual news sources, had they not been constantly lied to.

      Now with what you said, please understand that there are loads of highly armed militia groups out there in the US that would love to go into detail of that “any means necessary”. Were this to happen, you’re basically talking civil war. once that happens, everyone loses, you will too.

      I think that the only way to repair this divide is to keep building bridges, keep talking, keep listening, because once it gets too far, then that’s it. One only has to look at Yugoslavia as an example of what happens when neighbor starts massacring neighbors. There is no winning for anyone.

    • b1tstrem1st0
      link
      fedilink
      English
      210 days ago

      Tolerance is tolerance and it can break any time. You just keep tolerating until you can’t anymore, as simple as that. Its artificial.

  • @Bgugi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3711 days ago

    Nobody has a problem censoring hateful and harmful content, so long as they’re the ones that get to decide what that means.

    • @Demdaru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 days ago

      I have a problem with idea of gov sayimg what goes. Whatever gov. If it’s your site - whatever goes, goes. You set the rules. Sheesh.

      But I admit I am nos so sure when it comes to giants like FB or X. If they were like that from the get go, sure, but sudden switch is iffy as hell.

  • @RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    19 days ago

    I think the difference is between protecting wealth and power vs protecting basic human rights.

    It’s censorship one way or the other. The paradox of tolerance comes into play. We can’t ignore hate, it needs to be visible so people can be on guard, but we also can’t let it take over by letting it run roughshod and unchecked. Those in charge of media and social media are in the first camp - protecting wealth and power, letting hate run rampant. It drives profits and engagement, the extremes of politics they support give them control.

  • @surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    011 days ago

    He just wants more censorship. They will ban “hateful” content, and then reclassify anything they don’t like as hateful. We’re already seeing a number of platforms and institutions labeling criticism of Israel as hate speech.

  • @dx1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    7
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Who decides when the content is “hateful”? The perpetrators of genocide characterize themselves as marginalized and their victims as a force seeking to eradicate them. That is the problem with censorship. Those are the people who end up with the control of speech. You end up with an Orwellian inversion of concepts like hateful speech for the exact reason that they can be weaponized for profit and power.

    You show me which fascist government is going to censor the fascists living under it. It’s a paradox. They will not. They will censor the resistance.

    • b1tstrem1st0
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      We’ve come to decide ‘hate content’ on ideological basis that the question of ‘who decides’ arises. If people could be more realistic than idealistic, that would’ve never been the issue. In this situation, what’s in your head becomes more important than what you really need because something didn’t go your way.

  • @Ledivin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -8
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    It’s literally censorship, but I argue it’s acceptable - even desirable and laudable - censorship

  • @blazeknave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    310 days ago

    Some might call it a… what’s that word? Responsibility?

    Like that whole neighbor and community upstanding injustice and leveraging their privilege for the have nots thing that has defined modern human society up until Cambridge Analytica?

  • OneMeaningManyNames
    link
    fedilink
    English
    611 days ago

    Meta’s anti-LGBT rules are closely knit to their ending the fact-checking: It is science denialism and linked to racism and vaccine skepticism.

    Homosexuality and gender identity are not considered mental illnesses, Sex is not a binary, and Race is not connected to intelligence.

    Bigots never liked science on these three, and now they use political power to impose their narrative.

    Meta never moderated such discourse. Nor reddit nor twitter nor youtube. There was no censorship to end here. What this is, it is a free pass to punch down trans and gay people. It is incitement to violence, and Zuckerberg and Musk must go to the gallows for it.

    Don’t get me started on the toxic harassment these platforms have allowed against African and Carribean reparation activists, how they have destroyed the lives of feminists, and how they have named all Palestinians terrorists.

    At this point race realists and gender essentialists have ensured political and technological control of the narrative.

    There is no room for debating sealioning trolls on this one. If they don’t understand the social dynamics against gender/sex/minorities at this moment, they are no better than brownshirts.

    It is permabans and hooks and jabs all the way, for every single weird freak that backs this deranged hateful shit.

  • b1tstrem1st0
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -410 days ago

    And we say we are living in a democracy. Mark my word, there is not a SINGLE democracy in the world. It sounds good on paper but the technicalities are far from theory.

  • Allah
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -910 days ago

    leftists have become what they hated the most, horsehoe theory is real people, call it horseshoe fact

      • b1tstrem1st0
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 days ago

        Freedom of speech, rationality, pragmatism to name a few. What else, lolz!

      • @Zero22xx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        Because they’re evil, fascist, thought police for wanting to take away our god given right to tell entire groups of people that they’re subhuman on the internet. Unlike those valiant and heroic free speech and freedom of expression warriors that burn and ban books, police other people’s identities and cheer as a handful of conservative billionaires buy up all the free press and social platforms.

        Edit: /s just in case.

  • @Fedditor385@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    310 days ago

    It IS censorship and they should stop saying it isn’t, but they should clearly say “we will censor X because Y” and be transparent about it. Censorship where the majority of population agrees with it is still censorship, but approved and accepted for the greater good.

    Now, the question is what does “hateful” mean? And where does “hateful” start and begin? Is saying “I hate my neighbour” and “I hate Nazis” the same? Is “I hate gay people” and “I hate Manchester United” the same? Why not focus on violence instead of hate. We should have the freedom to hate (hear me out…) but in the end it is a feeling and a preference and no censorship will change that. What should be prevented at all costs however, is violent content. People can love or hate whoever, but they shouldn’t be allowed to call upon any type of violence towards them.

    Someone hating someone doesn’t change a thing, but someone calling for attacks against someone - this is a whole new dimension and deserves total censorship.

  • @los_chill@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    110 days ago

    Why is this not as simple as adding a setting button for moderation of hateful content? The user can decide to filter it out.