You're viewing a single thread.
We all saw the undeniable evidence that Twitter had suppressed anything not in line with the positions of the left. If "X" is now doing exactly the same thing regarding posts not conforming with positions of the right then it's just more bullshit. What is the problem with treating every position equally? I understand censorship in regard to things like doxing, child porn, and calls for violence.....but everything else should be allowed and let users decide for themselves. Haven't we had enough of being "told" what to think.
“Hey guys, I think vaccines cause autism but THE LEFT won’t let me spread my bullshit online!
Isn’t that the same thing as platforming actual Nazis???”
You totally missed the point. If someone posted that and if you were capable of thinking for yourself you would research it on your own. And you would then be able to post a link supporting your position. Do you want to possibly change the position of the person and others in the same mind set making the original post or do you just want to censor them. Censorship is what causes the divide. Both sides of an issue being posted causes people to think and hopefully come together.
“Research it on my own”? By doing what? Running clinical trials? We have experts as a society for a reason.
You’re probably the kind of person who thinks it’s a massive government overreach that you’re forced to wear a seatbelt.
You don't need to be a scientist to research medical things. There are multiple sources that will provide information that you can evaluate for yourself
The unfortunate reality is that most people don't have the skills required to critically read scientific literature.
It takes time to search terms and figure out what it really being said. But I'd rather take the time then to live in a hive mind that TELLS me what to think
But then do you ignore that research when the result is different than you expected? Like this one?
Or will you not claim exactly the opposite of what the article you provided shows when the topic comes up the next time around?
Because there is little point to doing your OwN rEsEaRcH if you are going to ignore the outcome anyhow when it doesn't fit your worldview.
And then what? At the end of the day, unless you're running the experiments yourself, you're still putting your trust in another group of experts. Either you trust that they really did what they said they did and saw what they said they saw, or you trust another group to draw the correct conclusions from a collection of studies and what they know about the topic.
Perhaps you should start your own research here to understand why that doesn't actually work the way you seem to think it does : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Most people believe shit without checking. Even I forget to use my brain frequently. I used to believe in the market place of ideas, but that got millions dead of COVID and fascists winning on platforms they completely lied about, so I don't think the market works.
We all saw the undeniable evidence that Twitter had suppressed anything not in line with the positions of the left.
The green line is (at least) the one you need.
We all saw the undeniable evidence that Twitter had suppressed anything not in line with the positions of the left.
Called out. Posts this:
Did you mean this... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/22/twitter-admits-bias-in-algorithm-for-rightwing-politicians-and-news-outlets
But apparently doesn't read past the headline.
Home feed promotes rightwing tweets over those from the left, internal research finds
The research found that in six out of seven countries, apart from Germany, tweets from rightwing politicians received more amplification from the algorithm than those from the left; right-leaning news organisations were more amplified than those on the left; and generally politicians’ tweets were more amplified by an algorithmic timeline than by the chronological timeline.
According to a 27-page research document, Twitter found a “statistically significant difference favouring the political right wing” in all the countries except Germany. Under the research, a value of 0% meant tweets reached the same number of users on the algorithm-tailored timeline as on its chronological counterpart, whereas a value of 100% meant tweets achieved double the reach. On this basis, the most powerful discrepancy between right and left was in Canada (Liberals 43%; Conservatives 167%), followed by the UK (Labour 112%; Conservatives 176%). Even excluding top government officials, the results were similar, the document said.
Ha ha lol you've been schooled.
Your request for tag "conservative moron" has been approved!