Post Ak0cnYdKp77Uc0LtVA by pcbeard@sfba.social
(DIR) More posts by pcbeard@sfba.social
(DIR) Post #Ajz5JfPxXmppJuH8CW by futurebird@sauropods.win
2024-07-16T09:44:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
If you have control of a social network there are many ways to shape political conversations and change what political ideas people view as normal and popular. For example you could ensure that posts with key words from one political perspective are more likely to be shown to people who have a history of arguing with those ideas. You could ensure that posts from ideologies you support are shown first to a friendly audience, and then to everyone after they accumulate supportive comments.
(DIR) Post #Ajz5ZpgF9hEPmZbHhA by futurebird@sauropods.win
2024-07-16T09:47:05Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Many people think that this kind of control is just about banning or NOT banning bad actors. Or "shadow bans" but that's just the obvious stuff. The person who runs your social network has massive control over one of the windows people use to gauge the opinions of others. When I think about liberals and left wing people who are on facebook and X ... when I think about them complaining about how horrible these places are (and they are right)I wonder if they ever consider it's by design?
(DIR) Post #Ajz6dYD49WBai8I1T6 by electric_gumball@mastodon.social
2024-07-16T09:58:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird IMHOX is a dead zone now, the only valid reason for anyone to still be there is to be an observer & an independent recorder, for history.
(DIR) Post #Ajz6nG1Ae0MvBZM1VQ by f800gecko@mastodon.online
2024-07-16T10:00:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird My own cycnical view is the left wing ‘influencers’ who’ve stayed there did so because they can still monetize it; the risk of leaving looks to them too great. Probably some (many?) would be at personal financial risk in leaving. As to the others, we can look to the same motivators of people who betray nations: MICE - money, ideology, compromise, ego—there being two leading candidates on that list where even one is quite sufficient, generally.
(DIR) Post #AjzGLcTiXh9MHLAOqe by Colby@mastodon.world
2024-07-16T11:47:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird and those who continue to patronize x will undoubtedly fall prey to such manipulation. So called “journalists” included.
(DIR) Post #AjzGPiNSYH4BjUBzMG by glennsills@dotnet.social
2024-07-16T11:48:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I am shocked to believe that you think someone like Musk would use his platform for propaganda... **shocked! **
(DIR) Post #AjzJnjod9ieR0Q32ye by llewelly@sauropods.win
2024-07-16T12:26:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird there is a considerable portion of the left, and a much larger portion of the center which remains in dangerous denial of the deliberate malevolence of facebook. But many know, and yet remain because they feel trapped; they know most of their friends and family will make no effort to use non-facebook means of contacting them after they leave facebook.
(DIR) Post #AjzZW7wwHn3BuUYiDQ by pamela6591@mastodon.social
2024-07-16T15:22:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird In order to shape the political conversation, one must first be in a position to be shaped. I, for one, am shaped by a powerful sense of shared humanity, not by how others define me.
(DIR) Post #Ak0cnYdKp77Uc0LtVA by pcbeard@sfba.social
2024-07-17T03:34:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I’m done with twitter, Facebook, Threads. I left FB after the 2016 election. Twitter after Musk. Reddit after they drove 3rd party clients off the platform. Any others I should cross off my list?
(DIR) Post #Ak1B5Em2nQaQfm1mOO by plsik@mastodon.social
2024-07-17T09:58:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird Yes, we are. For example, Elon Musk probably bought Twitter and turned it into X with the intention of massively promoting his agenda and Donald Trump's agenda.