• raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The “precise and specific actions” called for in that article, specifically for the purpose of combating speech that encourages violence, like homophobia or white supremacy:

      • Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.

      • Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.

      • Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation.

      • Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things.

      What’s your problem here?

            • raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t think being anti white supremacy and homophobia is shitty or controversial. Why would an Internet company write an article about something that affects the biggest sector of the Internet, social media? 🤔
              “No they should stay in their lane and only talk about, I don’t know, CSS or something.” I don’t buy it.

                • raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  …the article you linked me? The topic of this discussion?

                  It shouldn’t be controversial to anyone. The suggestions given there are pretty mild. Regardless, justice is not the absence of conflict. Sorry the article made you upset but that doesn’t make it wrong.