• DarkGamer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think exceptions need to be made for obvious propaganda, disinformation, gaslighting, and hate speech. Dangerous lies and calls for violence do not need a platform, that’s quite different from silencing people for merely having a different opinion.

    • TheGoodKall@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with the spirit of what you’re saying, but it seems too easy for those definitions to get spun off into just “things the majority dislikes” which isn’t great. I would hope that dangerous lies could be countered in the comments, and the platforms are then setup to always include this conversation rather than letting the first poster hog the megaphone

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I used to believe the free marketplace of ideas worked this way, then the Trump years and the pandemic happened. It became clear to me that many people cannot and/or do not care to know the difference between evidence-based conclusions & obvious and dangerous lies, provided it supports their preexisting biases. Just look at the hostility many harbor for fact-checking.

        “A lie will fly around the whole world while the truth is getting its boots on.”—Mark Twain, (possibly apocryphal quote but still relevant)