The basic foundational argument, as I see it, for the social media giants, is that basically all people are good people and therefore should be free to voice their opinions. Pretty much a fourth grade argument that shouldn't have any takers. We are a species who roams between mental anguish and egotistical gratuity. We have very little, …
The basic foundational argument, as I see it, for the social media giants, is that basically all people are good people and therefore should be free to voice their opinions. Pretty much a fourth grade argument that shouldn't have any takers. We are a species who roams between mental anguish and egotistical gratuity. We have very little, if any, spiritual alliances. We have religious alliances which are basically a mirror of the same stated human proclivities. Consequently, we unload our worst impressions on the internet seeking some relief from this cycle of mental anguish to egotistical gratuity and back again. Perfect formula for the money changers of the social media corporations, but not so good for our human psyche. One has to wonder how long we will continue to wade in the sewer before we demand an exit.
I strongly disagree, in part because of what happened to me this morning, and not for the first time: FB *instantaneously* pulled a post of mine in which I shared the link to a recent post from a Substack I follow. (Along with the link, I included an explanation of why I thought the post worth reading.) FB's "reason" for pulling it was that it considered the post "misleading" and an attempt to "get clicks." The share was no such thing. It did, however, have political content in that it was criticizing the (abysmal) MSM fact-checking of Democratic convention speeches. My experience confirmed that of several other Substackers who'd had the same experience with the same post. Short version: FB at least doesn't believe that "basically all people are good people and therefore should be free to voice their opinions."
I religiously block every right-wing MAGA, Q-Anon item on my feed. I don't ask for them; I don't click on them and I certainly don't want them. Yet FB keeps pushing them on me. That's no accident. And for the record, some random sub stacker isn't a qualified fact-checker.
I use FB Purity so I never see any of that stuff. What do you mean by "some random sub stacker isn't a qualified fact-checker"? The Substack I referred to included screenshots from Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post, among others.
I was likely reactive and I apologize. I jumped to conclusions that clearly weren't warranted. In my defense, I am utterly exhausted with people sending me messages with, "Do your own research" citing some no-name spouting disinformation on YouTube, or a forum. Whenever I get "my post pulled for disinformation," my go-to is skepticism. Again apologies for being a jerk. Long day.
Thanks for apology! As an editor (working mostly on trade nonfiction) I do fact-checking as part of my job. When I'm writing (even posting on Substacks), the internal editor hovers over my keyboard and occasionally asks "Are you *sure* about that?" IOW, I take fact-checking seriously.
The basic foundational argument, as I see it, for the social media giants, is that basically all people are good people and therefore should be free to voice their opinions. Pretty much a fourth grade argument that shouldn't have any takers. We are a species who roams between mental anguish and egotistical gratuity. We have very little, if any, spiritual alliances. We have religious alliances which are basically a mirror of the same stated human proclivities. Consequently, we unload our worst impressions on the internet seeking some relief from this cycle of mental anguish to egotistical gratuity and back again. Perfect formula for the money changers of the social media corporations, but not so good for our human psyche. One has to wonder how long we will continue to wade in the sewer before we demand an exit.
I strongly disagree, in part because of what happened to me this morning, and not for the first time: FB *instantaneously* pulled a post of mine in which I shared the link to a recent post from a Substack I follow. (Along with the link, I included an explanation of why I thought the post worth reading.) FB's "reason" for pulling it was that it considered the post "misleading" and an attempt to "get clicks." The share was no such thing. It did, however, have political content in that it was criticizing the (abysmal) MSM fact-checking of Democratic convention speeches. My experience confirmed that of several other Substackers who'd had the same experience with the same post. Short version: FB at least doesn't believe that "basically all people are good people and therefore should be free to voice their opinions."
I religiously block every right-wing MAGA, Q-Anon item on my feed. I don't ask for them; I don't click on them and I certainly don't want them. Yet FB keeps pushing them on me. That's no accident. And for the record, some random sub stacker isn't a qualified fact-checker.
I use FB Purity so I never see any of that stuff. What do you mean by "some random sub stacker isn't a qualified fact-checker"? The Substack I referred to included screenshots from Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post, among others.
I was likely reactive and I apologize. I jumped to conclusions that clearly weren't warranted. In my defense, I am utterly exhausted with people sending me messages with, "Do your own research" citing some no-name spouting disinformation on YouTube, or a forum. Whenever I get "my post pulled for disinformation," my go-to is skepticism. Again apologies for being a jerk. Long day.
Thanks for apology! As an editor (working mostly on trade nonfiction) I do fact-checking as part of my job. When I'm writing (even posting on Substacks), the internal editor hovers over my keyboard and occasionally asks "Are you *sure* about that?" IOW, I take fact-checking seriously.