For me I would hold the social media companies more to account when it comes to hate speech and harassment online and force social media companies to do more to stop online harassment and hate speech.
For me I would hold the social media companies more to account when it comes to hate speech and harassment online and force social media companies to do more to stop online harassment and hate speech.
That only really works if the government is preventing you from saying it, and it’s not something like slander or causing panic. If your lemmy instance banned talking about Pickles, it’s not a free speech issue. It’s a private instance who can have their own rules.
deleted by creator
You better be ready to own the consequences of that stance, which I assume you’ve been privileged not to need to. You can look up any number of mass shooters or terrorists who only got there due to online radicalization.
I always find this take to be remarkably short-sighted.
Because if you actually want to hear diverse opinions, you have to cultivate a space where diverse people, with diverse experiences, feel free to speak.
Pretty much every space that tolerates open bigotry becomes deeply unpleasant for the targets of that bigotry. Which means those people tend to leave.
Which in turn means that those spaces soon turn into the dullest echo chamber, populated only by people unaffected the bigotry. Sure no views were censored. You just harass everybody different off the platform. The net effect is the same.
deleted by creator
I’m not talking about “the principal of free speech”. I’m pushing back on the foolish assertion that moderation leads to echo chambers for lazy and dull minds. When exactly the opposite is true.
I’m saying that if you want to hear diverse opinions, a free-for-all is a bad idea. Because that free-for-all leads to echo chambers.
No no, don’t make stupid assumptions about me so that you don’t have to confront my point.
Most of them do. Your assumptions are wrong.
I never said free speech was inherently bad. Try responding to what I wrote, not what you imagined that I wrote.
deleted by creator
There is no space where all opinions are welcome. It simply does not exist. Some opinions are going to force out others.
If you run a space where Nazi opinions are okay to speak, you can’t really expect to hear Jewish opinions. Or opinions of PoC or queer people or disabled people and so on and so on.
So most places do the calculations. You can ban this one view. And in return an entire spectrum of views becomes more welcome.
Bigotry is a painfully simple, painfully shallow, and painfully boring viewpoint. It is almost completely one-dimensional, simplifiable to the idea that the “other” is inferior or dangerous and is to be shunned or feared. It is a viewpoint that we all already know, one we have all already heard. Banning it loses us almost nothing, and in return we gain so, so many more valuable insights.
deleted by creator
I’d urge you to try and read my comments again.
@Dyskolos @darq
"But what insights do we gain from banning them? "
We gain the insights of anybody who would be chased out of the discussion by the nazis being there.
@Dyskolos Moderation makes sure I don’t get *too* many internet perverts sharing their most horrible fantasies with me. I rather like it actually.
@darq
I have no idea where you are to receive such things. I never did, and I’m on the net since it started.
@Dyskolos @darq “But how can I hear “diverse opinion” if X opinions are banned/blocked/moderated in the first place?” i believe Stormfront has chat forums
deleted by creator
@Dyskolos no. i’m pointing out that your argument is dishonest. nothing is stopping you hearing diverse opinions. you are arguing for nowhere to be able to have their own standards which is a separate, harder lift than “fReAzE PeAcH!?!”
@Dyskolos This is a pro-censorship opinion. You just want to have plausible deniability while your Nazi friends do your censorship for you with death threats, doxing and stalking. Go away, pro-censorship troll.
@phillaholic
deleted by creator
@Dyskolos So you wouldn’t let bigots use threats and harassment to censor people, right? You would want to stop that from happening?
@phillaholic
Free speech doesn’t mean free harassment or threats. What is wrong with you? I can say “i hate green hair” but i surely can’t say “i hate everyone with green hair. Let’s kill them!” Is that concept really so hard to grasp?