Jump to content

Twitter encourages hate speech targeting gays & lesbians


SouthOfTheBorder

Recommended Posts

Making the mature choice to not be offended by trolls is a strong one.

You're only going to make me feel bad/sad/mad if I genuinely care about you. 

Otherwise, take your best shot: I'll probably laugh right along with you.

And as long as we're discussing it, click on my Twitter link below :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

Don’t support a platform that encourages LGBTQI attacks !

if you’re a Twitter user, delete your account today 
 

651c7b0a-a7ec-4614-8cf5-09adbde22350-AP_
WWW.USATODAY.COM

Major social media platforms inadequately protect users from anti-LGBTQ rhetoric, GLAAD said Thursday...

 

Hell no. I do not run away and give away a platform to the POS posters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, BenjaminNicholas said:

Making the mature choice to not be offended by trolls is a strong one.

the individual user experience is not the point 

for social media in general - participation supports those corrupt companies & people

as an example: many people on the left can’t quit talking about how much they hate Trump - yet, they remain on Facebook, and in effect supporting Facebook - when it was Facebook that made Trump & his victory in 2016 possible. 

the bigger societal problem is nobody draws a line in the sand and says enough with these social media companies - the social media companies play the most significant role in the destruction of American society, civility, politics and almost everything else.  
And people just can’t quit using those platforms.
I don’t get it - social media is not necessary for daily living and you’ll actually recapture hours for other things by getting rid of it. It’s one thing if your professional livelihood depends somehow on social media - but that’s just not the case for most people.

I wouldn’t patronize a hotel, airline, restaurant or destination that was actively hostile & promoted hate speech against LGTBQI people - why is it somehow ok on social media ? 
 

 

Edited by SouthOfTheBorder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

the individual user experience is not the point 

for social media in general - participation supports those corrupt companies & people

as an example: many people on the left can’t quit talking about how much they hate Trump - yet, they remain on Facebook, and in effect supporting Facebook - when it was Facebook that made Trump & his victory in 2016 possible. 

the bigger societal problem is nobody draws a line in the sand and says enough with these social media companies - the social media companies play the most significant role in the destruction of American society, civility, politics and almost everything else.  
And people just can’t quit using those platforms.
I don’t get it - social media is not necessary for daily living and you’ll actually recapture hours for other things by getting rid of it. It’s one thing if your professional livelihood depends somehow on social media - but that’s just not the case for most people.

I wouldn’t patronize a hotel, airline, restaurant or destination that was actively hostile & promoted hate speech against LGTBQI people - why is it somehow ok on social media ? 
 

 

Or you do not understand social media, or you are too intolerant to live with people who disagree with you or hate others and themselves. 

I agree there is a challenge with how freedom of speech has evolved since the Internet and social media became mainstream. However, running away from the challenge is not the correct response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, José Soplanucas said:

Or you do not understand social media, or you are too intolerant to live with people who disagree with you or hate others and themselves. 

I’ve been working in media for 40 years and specialized in digital for 15 -  i know exactly the data that can be collected, how it can be manipulated and used for whatever nefarious purpose anyone chooses to pay for.  I sat in enough meetings to literally get sick knowing what was going on behind the scenes.  

if you think it’s just about someone’s own user experience, tolerance, intolerance - then you have no idea how it really works behind the curtain.  most people don’t give it a second thought - thus, a naive & malleable user base ready for manipulation.

the front facing encouraging of hate speech targeted towards minority groups, largely driven by algorithms designed to create outrage & more engagement (you spending more time on those networks) is just the tip of the very toxic iceberg. 

if you think the purpose of social media is about free speech or an exchange of ideas - you do not have a clue 

the number one reason for social media is to keep you engaged at all costs - vacuuming up all of your data and online habits, then selling that data en masse to whomever is willing to pay and for whatever reason.  It’s not about free speech and it’s not an exchange of ideas.  It’s to make as much money as possible while building a base of users that can be monetized for their profit.  

Edited by SouthOfTheBorder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

the individual user experience is not the point 

This statement summarizes our different philosophies.  With individual freedom comes individual responsibility.  I will not relinquish my freedom because others are not responsible with theirs.  Other philosophies would encourage restricting liberty for the sake of a more pleasant and comfortable society, removing both the freedom and responsibility for actions from the individual.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." -Thomas Jefferson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, José Soplanucas said:

Welcome to Capitalism. I guess you are withdrawing to a cave out of the grid and society.

Capitalism when it suits them. Dictators & other despots when that’s more convenient.  

Just read about Facebook in the Philippines (and many other countries) where it’s the de facto internet gateway, thus allowing the regime to monitor, silence, capture & torture political enemies. Not so much freedom of speech there.  Not many ideas exchanged either. Facebook will do whatever they have to do in each country to keep operating.

no thanks - I’ll pass when it gets to dictators and torture.  Thus, exactly the problem with the lazy first world folks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are dozens of articles about Facebook & social media destroying countries like the Philippines 

In the Philippines, Facebook is the internet - users must access FB as their internet gateway, thus FB has total control over the population - and however the regime chooses to weaponize that power against the people.

The Atlantic November 2022 

original.jpg
WWW.THEATLANTIC.COM

If you live in a country where democracy is still intact: Don’t wait.

 

Edited by SouthOfTheBorder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

there are dozens of articles about Facebook & social media destroying countries like the Philippines 

The Atlantic November 2022 

original.jpg
WWW.THEATLANTIC.COM

If you live in a country where democracy is still intact: Don’t wait.

 

Oh. You are supporting The Atlantic, I see. You do know it is not a non for profit, right? I do like it the source, but your anti corporations mindset seems to be not very consistent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, José Soplanucas said:

Oh. You are supporting The Atlantic, I see

False equivalency

Last time I checked - the Atlantic isn’t destroying democracy, influencing election outcomes, empowering dictators or surveilling people.  Btw - dozens of articles from various sources that all say the same thing about FB & similar. 

but hey - I get that you just want to post vacation pics !  
It doesn’t matter what happens in those OTHER countries….it’s probably just a little torture anyway 

Edited by SouthOfTheBorder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

8 minutes ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

False equivalency

Last time I checked - the Atlantic isn’t destroying democracy, influencing election outcomes, empowering dictators or surveilling people.  Btw - dozens of articles from various sources that all say the same thing about FB & similar. 

but hey - I get that you just want to post vacation pics !  
It doesn’t matter what happens in those OTHER countries….it’s probably just a little torture anyway 

Ha. So childish and ignorant. I was correct. Another case of intolerance disguised as a progressive stand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What in the deep-dish windy city malarky is all this?!

Oh SVP …. Nobody draws a line in the sand? I’ll draw a line in the sand, for others’ ids and egos to trample over. C’est la vie. Nastiness, eating one’s own, on gay community message boards is rampant. Ever been to Queerty, Billy?

A propos of the subject of social media personal comportment and online trolling phenomena, how about hostile targeted shaming-oriented outing-grade demeaning deadnaming of gay dudes the mods can barely keep up with? It’s hella whack-a-mole work. 

AFAIK the article underlines trends and accountability but has not explicitly recommended individual boycotting. It seems geared to advocacy messaging with a view to pushing platform showrunners to do and score better.

If social media is so Beelzebub incarnate, why be all over it like a heat rash?

Edited by SirBillybob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, José Soplanucas said:

 

Ha. So childish and ignorant. I was correct. Another case of intolerance disguised as a progressive stand. 

Hey now, a dude’s dream-team in-fighting? Who’d have predicted? There’s a PhD in the works for a media studies grad student based on a 2-week platform slice alone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, SirBillybob said:

AFAIK the article underlines trends and accountability but has not explicitly recommended individual boycotting. It seems geared to advocacy messaging with a view to pushing platform showrunners to do and score better

I wouldn’t expect an essay like that to recommend a boycott - it was a broad warning about the destruction of democracy by social media platforms & meant for others to draw their own conclusions. 

Is it really that difficult to figure out the next step on a personal level ?  
It’s not of course, but Facebook has figured out the magic formula by appealing to the narcissists who think their “sharing” is essential and something they absolutely can’t live without.  Thus, the inability to quit and the mental gymnastics/blinders required to continue using.  And for many it’s an addiction  - it was designed that way.  Impossible to quit given all the stimuli required by the users. 

Interesting that among young people there is now a backlash of sorts against social media as Facebook is absolutely for the over 50 set that really doesn’t understand technology.  Thus, Facebooks desperate search for new products to re-engage their dying user base.  

I’d suggest social media users are the people in the cave - a cave where you are captive & where your every move is recorded, analyzed & then sold to whomever thinks they can use that data to sell you something or influence you in some way that is completely beyond your conscious comprehension.  Sounds like fun.  

Come for connecting w “friends”, then stay for the political violence, conspiracy theories & hate speech.  But, hey it’s free and everyone wants to know what I had for breakfast.


 

 

Edited by SouthOfTheBorder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

I wouldn’t expect an essay like that to recommend a boycott - it was a broad warning about the destruction of democracy by social media platforms & meant for others to draw their own conclusions. 

Is it really that difficult to figure out the next step on a personal level ?  
It’s not of course, but Facebook has figured out the magic formula by appealing to the narcissists who think their “sharing” is essential and something they absolutely can’t live without.  Thus, the inability to quit and the mental gymnastics/blinders required to continue using.  And for many it’s an addiction  - it was designed that way.  Impossible to quit given all the stimuli required by the users. 

Interesting that among young people there is now a backlash of sorts against social media as Facebook is absolutely for the over 50 set that really doesn’t understand technology.  Thus, Facebooks desperate search for new products to re-engage their dying user base.  

I’d suggest social media users are the people in the cave - a cave where you are captive & where your every move is recorded, analyzed & then sold to whomever thinks they can use that data to sell you something or influence you in some way that is completely beyond your conscious comprehension.  Sounds like fun.  

Come for connecting w “friends”, then stay for the political violence, conspiracy theories & hate speech.  But, hey it’s free and everyone wants to know what I had for breakfast.


 

 

The other side of social media addiction is social media influence exaggeration. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Social media can keep you on a mind leash that, in illusory fashion, mitigates the anxiety of demotion while pleasing you to death, offering surprise and revulsion, the tantalizingly unique catharsis of anger, while obscuring sadness that might otherwise occur if dwelling on the real world. It’s beautifully progressive and horrifyingly risky, the ultimate outcome uncertain, as with any stage of continuously transitioning human evolution.

Example: a platform ‘ban’ in generic terms is conceptualized as an impoverishment when regular sabbaticals might actually be best built in. Penalty or favour. That itself says volumes about the ways in which social media may be both positively facilitative and deleterious to quality of wellbeing. 

I don’t post on the socials but I lurk for what dovetails with the same types of needs gratification that manifested decades ago. All I know is that I can handle it. The notions of both harm reduction and abstinence surely have their place as in any other dependency phenomena, according to best individual fit.

Polarization, antithetical tension in perspective, is not itself a bad thing. There should be some degree of warning and caution … whether moderate or leaning to hyperbole is not that important. Many decisions are made in the context of disagreement. Often one can extract something relatable from a point of view that SEEMS incorrect or lacking, that apparent deficit often sourced in over-personalizing or in devaluing other.

Edited by SirBillybob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SirBillybob said:

platform ‘ban’ in generic terms is conceptualized as an impoverishment when regular sabbaticals might actually be best built in.

someone famously said -  I wouldn’t want to be in any club that would have me as a member  or thereabouts 

still rings true 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem w anyone who says something like - I’m completely educated about it & I accept the corresponding collateral destruction and I’m using it anyway & indirectly supporting/endorsing their actions. Because that’s what it is

Otherwise it’s just delusional bullshit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...