I agree in principle. Unfortunately, common sense doesn't seem to apply. We should disallow anonymous postings on those sites, and every person should be responsible for their actions and held accountable for what they say. I'm just not sure how to achieve that. Then if someone wants to post swastikas, they can live with the consequences…
I agree in principle. Unfortunately, common sense doesn't seem to apply. We should disallow anonymous postings on those sites, and every person should be responsible for their actions and held accountable for what they say. I'm just not sure how to achieve that. Then if someone wants to post swastikas, they can live with the consequences if any.
Hate speech is bad. I know that for sure. Do people who don't agree with abortion hate women? Is peacefully protesting in front of an abortion clinic a hate crime? I also know that if someone or some group has the authority to define hate, then anything will be defined as hate by some. Who gets to decide that?
But facts are chiels that winna ding,/An downa be disputed. - Robert Burns
"We should disallow anonymous postings on those sites, and every person should be responsible for their actions and held accountable for what they say."
I'm not entirely against this, but I think it would be even more unpopular than proper fact-checking. Plus, man of the worst liars on social media DO use their real names (I'm looking at you Elon).
Accountability for speech is hard at the best of times. It's incredibly rare that a single lie or comment leads to any real-world consequences. The problem I see is the cumulative radicalising effect of hundreds of thousands of dishonest posts, fed to you aggressively by and algorithm that excludes any counterpoints, until, oh, I don't know, ordinary people are incentivised to break into the capitol building and smear their sh*t on the walls.
There was no single piece of misinformation that could have done this. It's the cumulative lies that do the damage.
I agree in principle. Unfortunately, common sense doesn't seem to apply. We should disallow anonymous postings on those sites, and every person should be responsible for their actions and held accountable for what they say. I'm just not sure how to achieve that. Then if someone wants to post swastikas, they can live with the consequences if any.
Hate speech is bad. I know that for sure. Do people who don't agree with abortion hate women? Is peacefully protesting in front of an abortion clinic a hate crime? I also know that if someone or some group has the authority to define hate, then anything will be defined as hate by some. Who gets to decide that?
But facts are chiels that winna ding,/An downa be disputed. - Robert Burns
Would that it were so.
"We should disallow anonymous postings on those sites, and every person should be responsible for their actions and held accountable for what they say."
I'm not entirely against this, but I think it would be even more unpopular than proper fact-checking. Plus, man of the worst liars on social media DO use their real names (I'm looking at you Elon).
Accountability for speech is hard at the best of times. It's incredibly rare that a single lie or comment leads to any real-world consequences. The problem I see is the cumulative radicalising effect of hundreds of thousands of dishonest posts, fed to you aggressively by and algorithm that excludes any counterpoints, until, oh, I don't know, ordinary people are incentivised to break into the capitol building and smear their sh*t on the walls.
There was no single piece of misinformation that could have done this. It's the cumulative lies that do the damage.
Sadly true. We live in a strange world.