• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    17 hours ago

    That I would actually very much agree with. As Elon himself said in the early days of the Twitter takeover, “free speech does not mean free reach”.

    This is also why I think engagement algorithms are a cancer on our civilization. If it is in a platforms monetary interest to amplify the most vile anger inducing stuff, be that stuff that is actively bad like hate speech or simply divisive like a lot of political crap, that is bad for our society. It pushes us farther apart when we should be coming together to fix the problems that we can agree on.

    • @GeneralInterest
      link
      English
      24 hours ago

      As Elon himself said in the early days of the Twitter takeover, “free speech does not mean free reach”.

      I understood that to mean “I want to claim I’m a ‘free speech absolutist’ while actually only promoting things I agree with”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 hours ago

        In concept I agree with him on that. I support your right to say awful shit, but I am not going to spread that message to others. Where Elon lost the plot was thinking of Twitter as a public square. It’s a nice thought, but it requires the whole platform to be 100% neutral and unbiased. So it’s all good to call Twitter the public square, but that’s a lot harder to take seriously when the guy in charge of policing the square is heavily biased.