In my experience you could say all that stuff on Facebook anyway, I almost never had anything successfully removed when I reported it. If it wasn't an explicit slur it didn't matter how many times...
In my experience you could say all that stuff on Facebook anyway, I almost never had anything successfully removed when I reported it. If it wasn't an explicit slur it didn't matter how many times I had it reviewed.
Yeah, not sure what kind of content moderation was actually occurring... This is hyper specific and anecdotal but I happen to be in a group for a game about tabletop miniatures that revolves...
Yeah, not sure what kind of content moderation was actually occurring...
This is hyper specific and anecdotal but I happen to be in a group for a game about tabletop miniatures that revolves around vikings. It's pretty fun and mostly harmless (a lot of bad viking jokes), dad humor, miniatures being painted and some history. However one post happened to be random selfie from a guy with a bunch of Nazi tattoos that wasn't even related to the game or anything. Just out of the blue.
So naturally I reported it, since it was pretty clearly in violation of the groups rules and also Facebooks stance on hate symbols and speech. It got "reviewed" by eh Facebook content moderation team and found nothing to be wrong with the post. Which I found pretty alarming. But I guess since it was just a guy and his tats, I guess it was okay - who knows, maybe I'm overreacting. It was only when I messaged the groups mods that they took the post down.
So yeah, not really sure what kind of censorship or moderation they were doing.
Honestly - this whole thing seems like a giant PR stunt to get on the good side of Donny-boy before he gets into office and starts swinging hammers.
Another similar anecdote - I reported a comment literally praising Hitler and saying we need to bring him back. Not only did they say that that comment was acceptable, but my comment just calling...
Another similar anecdote - I reported a comment literally praising Hitler and saying we need to bring him back. Not only did they say that that comment was acceptable, but my comment just calling him out for being a Nazi was removed instead. Since then, I've always assumed Zuckerberg supported Nazi views (or at least pandered to them), and a few years later he's proving me right.
I get the impression he's more of a free speech absolutist than anything. He also doesn't want to make moderating decisions which will generate political heat.
I get the impression he's more of a free speech absolutist than anything. He also doesn't want to make moderating decisions which will generate political heat.
Yeah reporting it became mostly my way of getting it hidden for a few minutes. I'm talking awful stuff about trans people for example. It's clearly automated as quickly as most reports came back...
Yeah reporting it became mostly my way of getting it hidden for a few minutes. I'm talking awful stuff about trans people for example.
It's clearly automated as quickly as most reports came back and in such a way that almost anything is allowed.
This is a very convoluted 3 hour way for Zuck to say he wants to be on the winning side, especially when that side now controls the judicidary, controls the executive, controls both legislative...
This is a very convoluted 3 hour way for Zuck to say he wants to be on the winning side, especially when that side now controls the judicidary, controls the executive, controls both legislative houses, basically got away with an attempted insurrection of Congress four years ago and has openly pledged to wage a war upon DEI and LGBTQ rights.
I wonder how long it'll be until Spez follows suit with Reddit.
I do not have kind words for Reddit's Tintin-looking CEO. He is probably an even bigger snake than Mark Zuckerberg, and only purges content when it starts to look really bad to the company's shareholders. See for example: jailbait, creepshots, fatpeoplehate, the_donald, watchpeopledie, theredpill and the tonnes of racial hate and incel subreddits that once existed. Yes, some of these bans were during interim years where Spez wasn't involved, but the Jailbait sub existed, and was nominated "subreddit of the year" one year before he initially left Reddit.
When I moderated /r/interestingasfuck and let the users decide what was interesting they posted porn, and made fun of spez. I was removed and perma banned by the admins because they didn't think...
When I moderated /r/interestingasfuck and let the users decide what was interesting they posted porn, and made fun of spez. I was removed and perma banned by the admins because they didn't think the sub should change it's rules to allow graphic content. I got it, but they didn't remove all of the porn posts for well over a week. The anti spez posts were removed within hours.
Not only does Spez have the ego that Zuckerberg/Elon/Bezos etc have, but he seems to have a major chip on his shoulder about not becoming an obscenely rich billionaire like they did despite...
Not only does Spez have the ego that Zuckerberg/Elon/Bezos etc have, but he seems to have a major chip on his shoulder about not becoming an obscenely rich billionaire like they did despite running a very popular website. It's probably only a matter of time before he does something even more desperate in his attempt to "correct" this.
Moves like this only further support what others already suspected was behind the news orgs suddenly deciding that editors publishing endorsements for Presidential candidates was no longer going...
Moves like this only further support what others already suspected was behind the news orgs suddenly deciding that editors publishing endorsements for Presidential candidates was no longer going to happen and any other big about-faces these businesses and people have been making. These people are either running scared of the new administration, or are seeing a gigantic opportunity to capitalize off the new administration, or probably even a bit of both. The people on an individual, personal level, probably were running scared in fear of retaliation, but they're also cold-hearted businesspersons and on that level they decide the solution to being scared is to run into the cover of Trump's shit-covered coattails.
My reaction to the headline: Oh that's good. Perhaps he can have some good arguments about it. Oh, ffs. Never have I went from skeptic hopefulness to absolute disgust so fast.
My reaction to the headline:
Mark Zuckerberg defends Meta's latest pivot
Oh that's good. Perhaps he can have some good arguments about it.
in three-hour Joe Rogan interview
Oh, ffs.
Never have I went from skeptic hopefulness to absolute disgust so fast.
Can I ask - did you listen to the interview or is it just that he was on Rogan? I am not a Rogan listener, but my understanding is that most of the criticism of his show is that he's too...
Can I ask - did you listen to the interview or is it just that he was on Rogan?
I am not a Rogan listener, but my understanding is that most of the criticism of his show is that he's too credulous. From that standpoint, if you were interested in hearing Zuckerberg's arguments, Rogan's show is probably fine for that.
I'm not the one you're responding to and I don't listen to Joe Rogan either, but I did have the same reaction. In my eyes going on Rogan is Zuck adding himself to a long line of people like...
I'm not the one you're responding to and I don't listen to Joe Rogan either, but I did have the same reaction.
In my eyes going on Rogan is Zuck adding himself to a long line of people like Terrence Howard, Elon Musk, Andrew Tate, Alex Jones, Jordan Peterson, etc.
If I cared about what Zuckerburg had to say I'd go listen but this really doesn't lend him any extra credibility.
And Bernie Sanders, Andrew Yang, David Pakman, and Abby Martin. Rogan certainly has a more conservative platform, but it has a huge reach. If you want a non-traditional media platform with the...
And Bernie Sanders, Andrew Yang, David Pakman, and Abby Martin. Rogan certainly has a more conservative platform, but it has a huge reach. If you want a non-traditional media platform with the biggest megaphone, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot by not going on his podcast.
To be clear, I agree Rogan is a huge disseminator of right wing messages, but I think that's part of why left wing people should go on his platform to get out their messages. Relevant to...
To be clear, I agree Rogan is a huge disseminator of right wing messages, but I think that's part of why left wing people should go on his platform to get out their messages. Relevant to Zuckerberg though, it's clearly just part of his conservative messaging.
Thanks for bringing all the links. The bias, post-pandemic, is clearly even worse than I remembered.
Almost utter agreement. I will say though I'm not sure about "fuck yang". That article was news to me, and it was definitely a pretty wild take he had there, but unless that's a pattern of...
Almost utter agreement.
I will say though I'm not sure about "fuck yang".
That article was news to me, and it was definitely a pretty wild take he had there, but unless that's a pattern of behaviour of which I'm unaware...?
I worry if we're so quick to condemn potential allies our pool of agents for change is gonna get pretty small pretty fast.
Asian American here, sadly I donated once when he was coming up thinking he was okay but then I saw his shift and I've been saying "fuck andrew yang" for years now.
Asian American here, sadly I donated once when he was coming up thinking he was okay but then I saw his shift and I've been saying "fuck andrew yang" for years now.
I'm not sure if I should add politics tag, there are some part which might be triggering for folks who have not subscribed to politics topic. I leave it on mods to decide.
I'm not sure if I should add politics tag, there are some part which might be triggering for folks who have not subscribed to politics topic.
See I'm not an expert on this and this topic is more about where social media will head under GOP regime for next decade maybe. This is why I left a comment for better people to decide on this....
See I'm not an expert on this and this topic is more about where social media will head under GOP regime for next decade maybe.
This is why I left a comment for better people to decide on this.
This was/is not in bad faith, I was/am just unsure about this.
edit: tag is already edited and I think they have concluded the same.
The title of The Verge’s article is a bit more direct and blunt:
Mark Zuckerberg lies about content moderation to Joe Rogan’s face
We need more blunt and to-the-point headlines like that.
In my experience you could say all that stuff on Facebook anyway, I almost never had anything successfully removed when I reported it. If it wasn't an explicit slur it didn't matter how many times I had it reviewed.
Yeah, not sure what kind of content moderation was actually occurring...
This is hyper specific and anecdotal but I happen to be in a group for a game about tabletop miniatures that revolves around vikings. It's pretty fun and mostly harmless (a lot of bad viking jokes), dad humor, miniatures being painted and some history. However one post happened to be random selfie from a guy with a bunch of Nazi tattoos that wasn't even related to the game or anything. Just out of the blue.
So naturally I reported it, since it was pretty clearly in violation of the groups rules and also Facebooks stance on hate symbols and speech. It got "reviewed" by eh Facebook content moderation team and found nothing to be wrong with the post. Which I found pretty alarming. But I guess since it was just a guy and his tats, I guess it was okay - who knows, maybe I'm overreacting. It was only when I messaged the groups mods that they took the post down.
So yeah, not really sure what kind of censorship or moderation they were doing.
Honestly - this whole thing seems like a giant PR stunt to get on the good side of Donny-boy before he gets into office and starts swinging hammers.
Another similar anecdote - I reported a comment literally praising Hitler and saying we need to bring him back. Not only did they say that that comment was acceptable, but my comment just calling him out for being a Nazi was removed instead. Since then, I've always assumed Zuckerberg supported Nazi views (or at least pandered to them), and a few years later he's proving me right.
I get the impression he's more of a free speech absolutist than anything. He also doesn't want to make moderating decisions which will generate political heat.
Yeah reporting it became mostly my way of getting it hidden for a few minutes. I'm talking awful stuff about trans people for example.
It's clearly automated as quickly as most reports came back and in such a way that almost anything is allowed.
This is a very convoluted 3 hour way for Zuck to say he wants to be on the winning side, especially when that side now controls the judicidary, controls the executive, controls both legislative houses, basically got away with an attempted insurrection of Congress four years ago and has openly pledged to wage a war upon DEI and LGBTQ rights.
I wonder how long it'll be until Spez follows suit with Reddit.
I do not have kind words for Reddit's Tintin-looking CEO. He is probably an even bigger snake than Mark Zuckerberg, and only purges content when it starts to look really bad to the company's shareholders. See for example: jailbait, creepshots, fatpeoplehate, the_donald, watchpeopledie, theredpill and the tonnes of racial hate and incel subreddits that once existed. Yes, some of these bans were during interim years where Spez wasn't involved, but the Jailbait sub existed, and was nominated "subreddit of the year" one year before he initially left Reddit.
When I moderated /r/interestingasfuck and let the users decide what was interesting they posted porn, and made fun of spez. I was removed and perma banned by the admins because they didn't think the sub should change it's rules to allow graphic content. I got it, but they didn't remove all of the porn posts for well over a week. The anti spez posts were removed within hours.
Not only does Spez have the ego that Zuckerberg/Elon/Bezos etc have, but he seems to have a major chip on his shoulder about not becoming an obscenely rich billionaire like they did despite running a very popular website. It's probably only a matter of time before he does something even more desperate in his attempt to "correct" this.
Moves like this only further support what others already suspected was behind the news orgs suddenly deciding that editors publishing endorsements for Presidential candidates was no longer going to happen and any other big about-faces these businesses and people have been making. These people are either running scared of the new administration, or are seeing a gigantic opportunity to capitalize off the new administration, or probably even a bit of both. The people on an individual, personal level, probably were running scared in fear of retaliation, but they're also cold-hearted businesspersons and on that level they decide the solution to being scared is to run into the cover of Trump's shit-covered coattails.
My reaction to the headline:
Oh that's good. Perhaps he can have some good arguments about it.
Oh, ffs.
Never have I went from skeptic hopefulness to absolute disgust so fast.
Can I ask - did you listen to the interview or is it just that he was on Rogan?
I am not a Rogan listener, but my understanding is that most of the criticism of his show is that he's too credulous. From that standpoint, if you were interested in hearing Zuckerberg's arguments, Rogan's show is probably fine for that.
I'm not the one you're responding to and I don't listen to Joe Rogan either, but I did have the same reaction.
In my eyes going on Rogan is Zuck adding himself to a long line of people like Terrence Howard, Elon Musk, Andrew Tate, Alex Jones, Jordan Peterson, etc.
If I cared about what Zuckerburg had to say I'd go listen but this really doesn't lend him any extra credibility.
And Bernie Sanders, Andrew Yang, David Pakman, and Abby Martin. Rogan certainly has a more conservative platform, but it has a huge reach. If you want a non-traditional media platform with the biggest megaphone, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot by not going on his podcast.
To be clear, I agree Rogan is a huge disseminator of right wing messages, but I think that's part of why left wing people should go on his platform to get out their messages. Relevant to Zuckerberg though, it's clearly just part of his conservative messaging.
Thanks for bringing all the links. The bias, post-pandemic, is clearly even worse than I remembered.
Almost utter agreement.
I will say though I'm not sure about "fuck yang".
That article was news to me, and it was definitely a pretty wild take he had there, but unless that's a pattern of behaviour of which I'm unaware...?
I worry if we're so quick to condemn potential allies our pool of agents for change is gonna get pretty small pretty fast.
Asian American here, sadly I donated once when he was coming up thinking he was okay but then I saw his shift and I've been saying "fuck andrew yang" for years now.
I'm in total agreement of everything you wrote here! This Jersey boy is also very proud of having Andy Kim as a Senator.
Ahh, sounds like he's not the guy I'd been lead to believe.
I'm not sure if I should add politics tag, there are some part which might be triggering for folks who have not subscribed to politics topic.
I leave it on mods to decide.
See I'm not an expert on this and this topic is more about where social media will head under GOP regime for next decade maybe.
This is why I left a comment for better people to decide on this.
This was/is not in bad faith, I was/am just unsure about this.
edit: tag is already edited and I think they have concluded the same.