It's real. Twitter Shadowbanning is back.
It's real. Twitter Shadowbanning is back.
Our mission at Twitter 2.0 is to promote and protect the public conversation. We believe Twitter users have the right to express their opinions and ideas without fear of censorship.
“Freedom of Speech, not Freedom of Reach - our enforcement philosophy which means, where appropriate, restricting the reach of Tweets that violate our policies by making the content less discoverable.”
Surprise! Our great 'X' CEO has brought back one more bad thing that we hated about twitter 1.0: Shadowbanning. And they’ve given it a new name: "Freedom of Speech, Not Reach".
Perhaps the new approach by X is an improvement? At least they would “politely” tell you when you’re being shadow banned.
I think freedom of speech implies that people have the autonomy to decide what they want to see, rather than being manipulated by algorithm codes. Now it feels like they’re saying, “you can still have your microphone... We're just gonna cut the power to it if you say something we don't like”.
If you're still on Twitter, you're part of the problem.
People keep repeating this for easy self-righteousness. Again, what about small artists whose careers depend on their social media following?
Fuck Musk, but for better or worse this isn't just about him.
I'm not an artist but I know a lot of them and basically only use twitter to follow them. And honestly, the ball is in their court. I see a lot of them complaining about shadowbans and it being impossible to grow a following. But nobody wants to jump ship to a place without an audience.
The problem being there will be no audience sitting around a new platform waiting for a show to start. They need to start double posting, IMO. Being the change they want in the world. They don't have to quit twitter, but posting content to twitter and mastodon (for example) would give their audience a reason to move, would give them a chance to grow, etc.
There's even apps like PostyBirb that can do the multiposting for you.
So originally, it was that he was a "free speech absolutist," then it was that he was in favor of free speech "within the bounds of the law," and now he's not even in favor of that.
He never was, that was just an excuse to amplify the voice of his far-right buddies.
I know. It was more about what he said.
I don't believe this because it gives Elon Musk too much credit and honestly I think he's just a big loser who will latch on to whoever likes him at the time.
A series of stupid events led to Twitter being full of stupid far right nutjobs and stupid Elon decided they're his people now because they use his stupid platform.
Freedom for me but not for thee
You gotta be really stupid to believe people like him. They are all the same. It's like a mental sickness. You can feel it even just hearing him talk on TV. Sadly he seems to have the type of mental illness that America accepts and it's actually useful for greed and the American dream. Meanwhile good neurodivergent people suffer life long because society doesn't fit them.
I mean freedom of speech, not reach describes one boundary of the law in that nobody is required to give you a platform as far as i know.
However it does absolutely not fit to the free speech absolutism purported last year.
Raise your hand if you are convinced this will not impact the people who pay for the blue checkmark. Meaning that a lot of Elon Fanbois / Bots / Fascists will be seen with theit shitty takes (since the checkmark pushes your comments up), while voices of reason will be dragged down further.
Twitter is rapidly becomming the new Truth Social and it's sad to watch.
Well that was the whole point. His old friend Peter Thiel and others failed to set up a competing service against Twitter, so now they're undermining Twitter. Either Twitter steps into line and becomes what they want it to be, or it dies due to the $13bn debt/tax avoidance scam that Musk performed.
That was always the point of the blue check under Elon. It’s very clear already that blue checks have vastly higher reach and engagement. This all started back in December.
https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/23/23523845/twitter-blue-paying-priority-replies-conversations
It ruined so much of the appeal. Previously when someone was being a fucking idiot you could see them getting absolutely dragged in the comments, and it was cathartic. Now it's just blue check sycophants going "omg based".
Literally every single day we have idiots doing Musk’s PR work for free.
Downvote Musk spam. The billionaire doesn’t need your help ensuring his businesses stay in the 24 hour news cycle.
This community has a weird fetish for anything elon musk. If he scratches his butt, this community will post and comment about how much fingernail he used. And you are correct, everyone claiming to hate twitter/musk do a great job of keeping his company and name recognition relevant.
Yeah I was enjoying a lot of the drama, not so now, sick of seeing his mug plastered all over Lemmy.
Can we stop posting musk shit? It’s exhausting.
It's doubly exhausting for the hundreds of millions of people who are still there and are affected by this.
Like it or not (I don't), free speech has nothing to do with social media. Platforms are free to do this, it's the government that can't limit your speech like this.
Given those circumstances, I wonder if social media should be treated like infrastructure. That would fuse constitutional rights and the platform itself.
While you're right, I think the issue here is the hypocrisy of Musk claiming to be pro free speech (specifically on his platform) only to then repeatedly limit speech he doesn't personally like.
I feel pretty numb to right wing hypocrisy at this point. Which is probably their exact playbook.
Indeed. Personally my problem isn't with them limiting the "freedom of speech". It's with them claiming they have it or that it's even relevant there, as you've said.
Same page club. I think centralized social media is going to die sooner or later anyway*, so I'm thinking it's only a problem in the short term.
*Making money from social media just sounds like some weird shit in a history book to me, like merkins. We'll see I guess.
Free speech has nothing to do with social media or governments. Freedom of speech is a universal, natural right that has been with our species since we gained the power of speech through evolution.
yeah not sure about that. Most of human history would say freedom of speech (and most of the concept of natural rights) is a rather newish ideology. In the past, speaking negatively of higher powers (religious organizations, ruling class, etc) could lead to sanctions, imprisonment, or death and that is still very much the case in many countries to this day. We can argue _____ is a "natural right" till you have arthritis in your hand joints but you have to be blind to think governments have nothing to do with it and its enforcement. In a utopia, maybe it is granted naturally on birth but in reality it is a "right" that has to be "fought" for (legally or with arms). Like are you seriously arguing the people of North Kor... Sorry, I mean the Democratic People's Republic of Korea are born with this "natural right" of free speech but if they dare use it they and possibly their immediate family may be subject to torture, rape, reeducation camps, and/or work camps.
Well that’s just, like, your opinion, man.
You're generally right and I have nothing to take away from that. Right now I'm talking specifically about the "law" of free speech with regard to the US Constitution.
Sounds like it doesn't matter what Twitter does then. Human history spans several thousand years, possibly ten thousand. If freedom of speech has been there throughout, then Twitter is completely inconsequential, considering free speech was doing fine literally thousands of years before it.
This is from April. Did something change with it?
This is the most important comment on this thread. I wish lemmy forced you to post the date of the article
I have to strongly agree here. This needs to be a strongly written and enforced rule for social media. Dates and timestamps need to be extremely clear and a requirement for all sorts of news reporting.
The topic is trending on X today so I didn't noticed the date. But I guess there might have been some updates compared to April?
You are part of the problem.
So much for that free speech he was talking about.
"Free speech absolutist"®©™
(Terms and conditions apply)
Someone predicted that they were going to slowly add back all the stuff they took out and they were right
I think most people could have predicted that. Most of the things Musk removed were there for a reason (Regardless of whether they where popular with Twitter's users or not). Mostly of economical or legal nature. You cannot simply remove them if you want Twitter to someday make a profit.
Right at the beginning I said they would add it all back and/or get a never ending chain of lawsuits thrown at them and right now it's looking a bit like both.
You can say whatever you like... in the privacy of your own cell.
I mean, it was never about free speech. It was always about crippling a powerful communication tool that had been used to undermine Middle Eastern governments. "Free Speech" was just how Musk was able to curry favor with fascists and grift retards into paying for twitter blue.
it's not a revolution if you don't wind up where you started
I don't give a fuck about Twitter, stop posting this garbage already!
Stop calling it X
But when you're looking for a crap company and platform that's always been bad, but is also, surprisingly, somehow now much worse, X marks the spot.
The only thing absolute about Elmo is being a cuck.
Elmu!
#BoycottMusk
Everyone complaining or saying leave but nobody talking about alternatives that solve some of the problems. Mastodon exists. Nostr exists. BlueSky kind of exists.
The problem with the alternatives is there's no draw to any of these sites. Like people aren't going to Mastodon because it has some amazing features that everyone wishes Twitter had, they're going because they don't like Musk.
There's so much on Twitter that these other sites don't have that it's hard to justify leaving. There are so many politicians, reporters, athletes and teams, bands, artists, etc all on Twitter. I follow hockey pretty closely and every major trade that happened last season was first reported on Twitter. Will I get that breaking news on Mastodon? No, so what is the draw to Mastodon? What does the average user get out of moving over?
What do content creators get out of moving? An artist can have years of their work on their account as a portfolio to draw new fans and get work, but if they move none of those posts show up on Mastodon. Now they have to post their entire portfolio again, and that doesn't even guarantee that their audience will follow them. Now they're on a much smaller website with a much smaller audience and they're probably not going to get the same exposure or opportunities that they had when on Twitter.
Oh no.... Anyway
What are you even quoting bro
I was onboard until I read your comment. What is he even quoting bro?
It is a for profit place that has always put reach before speech. For-profit places are not bastions of free speech, they are bastions of making decisions that make them more money.
so this is why those shithole accounts have been showing up on my for you page.
Since when a rule change to (any site whatsoever) related to technology in any way? Yeah, we get it, you HATE "Xtwitter" and want it to burn but please... you are beating a dead horse at this rate. Just let it go.
That, or the mods around here need a reality check and start dropping some chill pills (i.e temp. bans) on users like OP..
It's not, but the top mod also runs a bot that automatically posts content from various news sites, probably based on keywords. And I'd bet that some of those keywords are Twitter and Facebook. So don't expect them to follow their own rules.
tech·nol·o·gy
/tekˈnäləjē/
noun-
the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry. "advances in computer technology"
-
machinery and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge. "it will reduce the industry's ability to spend money on new technology"
-
the branch of knowledge dealing with engineering or applied sciences.
Some bozo changing the rules on his social media site is not scientific knowledge.
-
Breaking News: Elon Musk throws gasoline on dumpster fire