Meta’s Moderation Modifications Mean Anti-LGBTQ Speech Is Welcome, While Pro-LGBTQ Speech Is Not
Meta’s Moderation Modifications Mean Anti-LGBTQ Speech Is Welcome, While Pro-LGBTQ Speech Is Not
I guess advertisers have no issues with Meta’s changes. Interesting. A few years ago, they’d be falling over themselves to signal that “hate has no place here”. But it is no longer profitable to be LGBTQ+ so let the hateful bell ring.
Eh. The advertisers will be back to supporting LGBTQ whenever that month of year comes back
This year? Doubt.
I wonder why nobody is considering the most obvious solution to all this complication around what is NSFW and what is not: Children shouldn't be on these platforms at all to begin with. They shouldn't be anywhere near social media until age 14. Definitely not free roaming everywhere on the internet.
For us adults, I honestly cannot say whether moderation instigated by a company is better than moderation instigated by the users. The devil is in the details. This place isn't moderated by a company and you'd probably think the moderation here is superior to Meta's.
I understand this sentiment because I had a similar story growing up, but I've had to come to terms that the internet of that era does not exist anymore.
Now we have these corporations who made it their goal to algorithmically trick you into spending more and more time engaged with their website for ad revenue, not caring how angry or misinformed people get in the meantime. It used to be a place we could escape to, but has turned into just another echo chamber/prison and worst of all - we're addicted to it.
I think places like Mastodon and the Fediverse can help bridge this gap, but on the whole, the internet is just not a safe place for developing brains anymore.
I'm with you on this. My childhood church was christo-fascist, and it was my wide wanderings on the web that showed me a different way was possible.
I found kind and supportive influences as a minor that kept me away from the hate/conservatism/fascism that many of my classmates descended into.
Do you think your classmates found those influences from somewhere outside the internet? At least in Europe, the alt-right has been way more efficient at reaching young people online, especially boys and men.
This is something parents should decide. They should know what kinds of content their kids will be exposed to, and decide when they're ready. This isn't something we should expect platforms or governments to decide.
Some parents will make terrible choices, but I think that's less bad than what's necessary to enforce either a ban or content moderation. I see nothing good coming from that longer term.
Sure that would be a much better situation than the current free-for-all and practically no control possibilities for the parents -- short of never giving them physical access to devices.
Posts with LGBTQ+ hashtags including #lesbian, #bisexual, #gay, #trans, #queer, #nonbinary, #pansexial, #transwomen, #Tgirl, #Tboy, #Tgirlsarebeautiful, #bisexualpride, #lesbianpride, and dozens of others were hidden for any users who had their sensitive content filter turned on. Teenagers have the sensitive content filter turned on by default.
Kids wont even know what they will lose with his representation going missing on Instagram. So depressing. Wish that lizard freak the worst.
Try existing in the rural parts of the country where no one is "like you", and increasingly they claim all that "Hollywood media" is just propaganda.
Seeing people like yourself, actual real people, has a huge impact in helping kids avoid isolation and in some cases connect with communities and avoid suicide.
Feeling alone in the world is something teens are already prone to and this makes it so much worse for the LGBTQ kids out there. Their existence now being labeled on the same level as sexual content and gore.
Never used Facebook, never fucking will.
I haven't in over a decade. I think I'm up to eight different word filters trying to stop news stories about this from showing up on my feed. If they didn't have such a stupid name I could just block the term meta.
Plot twist: that was their plan all along.
Friendly reminder: Deleting your account won't accomplish what you think it will.
Facebook will still keep all data that is associated with other users as per their own disclaimer. They also still keep logs that are "disassociated with personal identifiers. "
So all training can still occur. And understand what while Jane Smith may have deleted her account, they still have all the data it takes to indicate that User 12345 was tagged in photos with John Smith at the Burger King on 404 Fake St. And, because of that, the data that User 12345 had previously provided is ALSO John Smith's data. And Fred Wilkerson since he was at that Burger King once. And so forth.
And ALL that data is still there for training.
So do what you gotta do to make it less appealing to other users. But understand your data is already out there and is never going away. Same with reddit and all other social media (which includes Lemmy).
Yeah but you know what? That's still better than actively engaging with their "services".
Eventually, it'll just be bots interacting with themselves, given enough time.
Eventually, it'll just be bots interacting with themselves, given enough time.
It seems like that's a good chunk of it already
Yes. Like I said. Do what you gotta do to make it less appealing to other users.
But if, for example, you are an LGBTQIA+ person who thinks this will provide any form of protection...
If you're in the US, sure. If you're in Europe you can compel them to completely delete everything as per the GDPR.
And I am sure a company that is now openly training their LLMs on copyrighted materials is going to totally comply with all of that...
One of these days people are going to learn "But it is against the law" doesn't apply to the rich and powerful, law enforcement, or megacorporations.
No, I tried, they don't comply, and tell you to make a complaint to your DPA and the Irish DPA or go to court if you have a problem with that.
Wait, Pro-LGBT speech IS NOT allowed!?!?! Holy fucking shit, this isn't a cesspool, it's an execution by firing squad.
That's a misreading of the headline. Pro-LGBT speech IS allowed, but often suppressed.
I was in admin chat on facebook and it was blocking any posts with links to https://lemmy.world/. I was talking to admins about firing up a lemmy instance and leave the FB group as a link to a lemmy community
I'm kinda shocked people still actively use Facebook.
Only ~3,000,000,000 people/month.
I would take the 3 B number with a pinch of salt. Its 3 B accounts, not unique individuals.
At one point last decade I had 11 seperate Facebook accounts, used for various purposes. They're all deleted now, but my behaviour is not unique. There will be many, many people running multiple accounts, and don't forget bots
I remember there were plenty of little bitches saying that censorship won't be turned the other way and that it allows to remove bad people from the Internet. That bad people should be censored, and Reddit\Twitter\Facebook when used for politics will not be abused by bot armies, and that censorship will not be repurposed very easily.
I was being accused of being a right-wing troll, a luddite, a retard, an incel and what not for saying that they were wrong on every point.
Yes, even bad people should not be censored. When they misbehave, they should be barred from the place they harmed, ideally not forever, but for a week or so maximum.
I've learned this not just in morals, but in practice, when repeatedly banned on one forum by an admin of directly opposite political views ... for 24 hours max each time after multiple warnings, and only once a week or a month (can't remember) much later when I joked about exploding Muslims. Despite that, I was (I hope) a good enough member of that forum for like 10 years after, till now. Apes waving banhammers today have something to learn from that.
But that's not the point, the point is that even if you consider centralized censorship good, that's how it works.
So getting back to little bitches loving censorship - where are they now and do they have anything to say?
Yes, even bad people should not be censored. When they misbehave, they should be barred from the place they harmed, ideally not forever, but for a week or so maximum.
"Won't somebody please think of the spam bots?"
The problem is that this childish 'murican view of free speech and censorship has poisoned the entire discussion, because it assumes every speech is equal. It's not. To think a group of idiots screaming on megaphones with the sole intent of causing a ruckus is the same thing as a 1 on 1 conversation is stupid. To equate a snake oil salesman with someone trying to sell a table is also stupid. Not all speech is done in good faith.
Censorship happens at any group, because it's all about maintaining social cohesion. Remember when trump was first elected and several family ties and friendships effectively ended? That was RL censorship, because trying to mend the social cohesion wasn't worth it. Why would you be close to someone who makes your life terrible?
I'm not talking about spam bots.
The problem is that this childish 'murican view of free speech and censorship has poisoned the entire discussion
No, it's your opinion that you're smarter than those who formed the "childish view" is what has poisoned a lot of things. The rest is either deliberate bullshit or you failed to read my comment.
Censorship happens at any group, because it’s all about maintaining social cohesion. Remember when trump was first elected and several family ties and friendships effectively ended? That was RL censorship, because trying to mend the social cohesion wasn’t worth it. Why would you be close to someone who makes your life terrible?
No, that's not censorship. You are not forbidding all your relatives to communicate with some other relatives, or else. You are just ending your own communication with someone else.
Go away.
No, it means all speach is welcome. Freedom of speach is a fundamental right and anyone advocating for censorship should take a long look into the mirror before calling other people fascist.
Clearly you didn't read the article. The first paragraph is about Meta censoring LGBTQ+ content
On Monday, Taylor Lorenz posted a telling story about how Meta has been suppressing access to LGBTQ content across its platforms, labeling it as “sensitive content” or “sexually explicit.”
Posts with LGBTQ+ hashtags including #lesbian, #bisexual, #gay, #trans, #queer, #nonbinary, #pansexial, #transwomen, #Tgirl, #Tboy, #Tgirlsarebeautiful, #bisexualpride, #lesbianpride, and dozens of others were hidden for any users who had their sensitive content filter turned on. Teenagers have the sensitive content filter turned on by default.
When teen users attempted to search LGBTQ terms they were shown a blank page and a prompt from Meta to review the platform’s “sensitive content” restrictions, which discuss why the app hides “sexually explicit” content.
People who comment on articles without reading the article itself should take a long look into the mirror before implying other people are advocating censorship.
Censorship is a constant. Power dynamics is a thing and will always be. Thinking that any of those big players truly care about any ideology is a mistake and the only true way of seeking "freedom of speech" is really to find your "tribe" that can support itself.
That's why we came to Lemmy. We don't want to be censored by big boss, we'd rather be censored by the owners of the Lemmy instances because at least they are closer to us.
What's going to happen is that you will now start listening more to people that were censored while your guy was in power, while they got censored for their opinions, as bad or as good as they are, you had your chance to speak, now as long as you are using mainstream media you will sit and listen like the good user you are.
The choice is yours Neo, either wake up and understand power dynamics or sit and listen like a good cumsoomer.
The choice is yours.
So preventing underage people from seeing NSFW content is oppression?
Free speech absolutists are so annoying. Your tolerance of the intolerant is so stupid. Yeah, protecting marginalized communities is fascism.
Go outside and check the political landscape. Now figure out how this change of policy relates to that atmosphere.
Now shut the fuck up about things you know not of. Protecting LGBTQ+ people is fascism? The fuck out of here with that.
Freedom of speech isn't a fundamental right. If you doubt this try publicly and clearly threatening people with the intent to harm. You will be prosecuted for that action.
You should avoid using words you almost cettainly do not understand which in this case is "fascist".
Cool, so you wouldn't mind if I went to all of your neighbors with your photo and told them about how you molest children, because freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Correct?
Are you aware of the details of what they're actually doing? Do you know how they're implementing these changes?
Hey guys, I just found madcat's CSAM stash on Google drive! There's also a video of him masturbating to it!
Hey, I'm just using my right to free speech! You can't censor me!
LGBTQ+Everyone, but LGBTQ+ people especially need to get the the fuck off of Meta services now, they've showed what side they're on.Straight+cis people too. I'm downloading an export of my Facebook info as we speak in preparation for closing it down.
I just deleted my old, disused Instagram account I hadn't touched in a long long time. Nothing even worth saving since I never uploaded anything to it. It was the only Meta account I still had around.
What can I do to piss them off if I never had any in the first place?
That sounds like encouraging queer folk to flee public spaces which sounds like a favourable outcome to the conservatives. Is giving ground the best idea really?
I don't know how to stress this any more clearly: A privately owned social media site isn't actually a public space. It's literally the definition of a private space. It's more akin to a mall than a library. That's the whole issue, how does it help to be on a site where all the admins have to do is shut down your speech and ban you anyway? Where everything you do, every move you make is tracked and monetized and studied to be used against you? It's by definition a surveillance state where you have no rights.
You realize they make money from ads and if the majority of people stop using their services they stop making enough money to function as a business? They may already have your data but you don't need to be giving them more.
The bigger issue is that corporations have commodified public spaces. You can take back public spaces by choosing to not use their services and convincing others not to. Facebook is already dying which is why they rolled out bullshit AI profiles and the public response to that went really badly. But they live and die by engagement so if they already are needing to turn to faking engagement to keep people on and money rolling in, then isn't a boycott literally the way to cut them off at the knees and stop them being a public space?
Forgive me if I didn't make clear that everyone needs to do it, not just LGBTQ+, my point is there are very few reasons to keep using these services for any person with a conscience.