Freedom of Speech, Not Reach: An update on our enforcement philosophy
blog.twitter.com
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”.

  • @[email protected]English
    14•1 year ago

    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.

    • @anlumoEnglish
      10•1 year ago

      I’m not so sure about that. The big tell is that whenever a far-right user complained to him about getting a tweet removed or the account getting banned or something like that, he’d respond that he’ll personally take care of it. Just imagine, a billionare running a platform with millions of users personally taking care of a single one. This never happened with other people.

      • @[email protected]English
        -2•1 year ago

        I personally haven’t heard of this, but if it’s true it’s probably just because he’s latched on to them like I was saying. He didn’t buy Twitter with some nefarious conservative intent to unblock far right accounts, he bought it because he’s an idiot who got into a pissing match on social media. He even tried to get out of the sale claiming “bots” and the owners threatened to sue the shit out of him.

        Edit: Lol people downvoting because I haven’t heard of this? Never said it’s not true, I just haven’t heard of it.

        • @anlumoEnglish
          5•1 year ago

          Example: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FgKSQUrXoAABPWi.jpg

          I agree with your assessment. I’m not claiming that he has a plan of any sorts, things just happen in a spur of the moment. However, that’s also the appeal of the far-right. It doesn’t need research or having a solid base of knowledge to base their opinions on, it’s just random stuff these people read on the Internet that feels good to them.