Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan
You can't legislate people having bad ideas and stupid opinions. You go too far down that road and you end up in the realm of "the one true opinion", or "the true believer".
That's very cultish and counter to the open society you hope to have. It's also the same problem you have with MAGA people.
Listen, I hate it too, but the reality is that you can't police thought, and you can't police speech in that way, at least not without major consequence and restriction of freedom. The other thing of course is that if Tucker is able to convince people that Trump won that debate, and they actually watched that debate with their own eyes, well those people were always going to bend that way, and he really didn't do a whole lot to change their minds.
I know that America is full of a lot of people who don't know a whole lot, and think even less, but it's also full of a lot of very bright people who have very sharp critical thinking skills. And yes, media does warp people sometimes. But the reality is that it's up to the individual to make sense of things and use their cognitive faculties to find the truth. It'd be nice if there were no malicious actors out there, but it's not the reality, and people have to guard against bad ideas with their own brains.
I think the vast majority of people see Trump for what he is. I also think that a lot of Americans simply don't like Democratic party policy and leaders, and that's all Trump really has ever tapped into. But the reaction to guys like Tucker spewing BS on tv isn't to create laws to restrict his speech, especially when it's a pure matter of opinion and not hard fact. All you have to do is point out how stupid and sycophantic he is, and most people will see it for what it is.
|
So I'm going to disagree, which is weird as i usually agree with your posts.
I think the issue is not the opinions, it's the use of technology to amplify those opinions, and who is in control for that amplification and manipulation.
BOTS
The easiest one I think we can all agree on is the use of bots. Much of twitter and reddit are bots, amplifying messages for other governments or for brands. Sometimes it's obvious, sometimes it's really subtle and all of us miss it.
But bots and managed accounts are really dangerous, as it makes it seem like fringe opinions have wide approval. People think "Maybe this wild idea i had is actually legitimate"
So I can't think of anybody arguing for bots, but I don't know how to get rid of them. I'm sure there is a way.
ALGORITHM
The second aspect is what are algorithm's allowed to promote? The issue is that misinformation drives engagement and time on site. So social media companies make money the more time you spend on their product. That's the only way to grow. This is really bad.
As an example, FB engagement went way down during the 2020 election as they really clamped down on misinformation. So as soon as the election was complete they went back to normal and engagement returned.
So the question is are we happy with complete freedom here? Not what people say, but what the algorithm promotes? I personally think we'd be better served as a society if the incentives were not enormously to promote divisive content and more screen time.
Again, I don't know how to solve this. I'm sure there are many people who have ideas.
MISINFORMATION
This is the hardest to regulate, as you put it. Anybody with money or power is funding research that explains their position is correct. You can tease data so many different ways.
I actually don't know how to solve this one, however suing people when their words have consequences is a good start.
Another aspect is knowingly spreading misinformation (I know, hard to prove) is something that we should be able to police. It could just be you lose your account for a period of time.