[HN Gopher] Former Reddit CEO Yishan Wong on the difficulties of...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Former Reddit CEO Yishan Wong on the difficulties of running a
       social media site
        
       Author : slg
       Score  : 37 points
       Date   : 2022-04-15 19:30 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (threadreaderapp.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (threadreaderapp.com)
        
       | pillowkusis wrote:
       | This thread is an interesting perspective on social media
       | "censorship" that you don't hear often.
       | 
       | Of course everyone working at a social media company has an
       | ideological bias, and that can come out in the product. But
       | consider also that the latest censorship controversy creates
       | negative PR, makes people leave the platform, attracts regulatory
       | attention, and ultimately, hurts the company's profits. Content
       | moderators are at least as worried about that as they are about
       | making sure their ideological opponents aren't given a voice.
       | 
       | Social media companies are in the unenviable position of playing
       | referee in the culture war, and like referees in any sport,
       | they're going to constantly be criticized for doing it, right or
       | wrong. These companies are global and universal, and there's no
       | way they can satisfy all parties. Sometimes, the values of left
       | and right, or Iran and the US, or Israel and Palestine, are just
       | irreconcilable. You're better off just trying to avoid as much
       | trouble as possible, and avoiding negative media attention.
       | 
       | Reddit is probably the most ham-fisted example of this approach.
       | Their content moderation is pretty hands off, but as soon as any
       | subreddit attracts negative attention, it's quarantined or
       | banned, no matter if the controversy is justified or not. When
       | Russia invaded Ukraine and Russia Is Bad Now, they just straight
       | up banned /r/russia and any link to an .ru domain! That does
       | nothing to address the conflict, but it does keep those NYT
       | opinion pieces from showcasing Problematic Russian Bot Behavior
       | on Reddit.
       | 
       | I'll note that I don't think this model fully explains moderation
       | policies at Twitter or other social media sites. I genuinely
       | believe moderation leans left due to an ideological monoculture
       | (I've seen it first hand). But it's important to recognize the
       | difficult situation social media sites are in.
        
       | qiskit wrote:
       | His description of "old internet" and freedom is wrong. The "old
       | internet" was predominantly american ( 90%+ ) and we didn't just
       | want to protect free speech from conservatives attacking porn,
       | but from everyone ( soccer moms, woke leftist, europeans, ADL,
       | canadians, etc ).
       | 
       | > it means you're standing up against EVERYONE, because every
       | side is trying to take away the speech rights of the other side.
       | 
       | Exactly. That's why the old internet defaulted to free speech.
       | Because everyone understood that taking their free speech meant
       | my free speech was vulnerable and it was impossible to just
       | censor one and not everyone else.
       | 
       | > It's also where Russia is fighting a real war against us
       | 
       | This nonsense. Just the russians? What about the british,
       | israelis, canadians, australians, saudis, chinese, iranians, etc.
       | Not to mention the biggest threat - our own government. What
       | percentage of foreign propaganda is russian? 1%? Just like all
       | the russian money spent on facebook gave trump the presidency?
       | All $40K was it?
       | 
       | > I want you to pause for a minute and think about your political
       | alignment and whether you're on the left or right of this issue,
       | because you probably think one of those things.
       | 
       | I'm neither and social media clearly leans towards one side.
       | 
       | > Elon is one of those, because he doesn't understand what has
       | happened to internet culture since 2004. Or as I call it, just
       | culture.
       | 
       | The culture was formed by censorship. The social media companies
       | are trying to change culture. Get rid of censorship and we'll see
       | about the culture. If yishan is right, how come real world
       | culture is so different from social media culture? Perhaps
       | because censorship allows a tiny minority to have the most
       | influence/say?
       | 
       | > Facebook's userbase has at various times been left-leaning,
       | then right-leaning, then bifurcated. So has Reddit's. Twitter's
       | also. The social platforms don't care.
       | 
       | Is that why they collectively banned trump. Because they don't
       | care?
       | 
       | > It is because we brought all of our old horrible collective
       | dysfunctions onto the internet
       | 
       | The horrible collective dysfunctions were on the old internet
       | long before social media.
       | 
       | > They are censoring because they are large social platforms, and
       | ideas are POWERFUL and DANGEROUS.
       | 
       | That must be why we censor libraries...
       | 
       | Instead of wasting pages of text and much of our time, he could
       | have been honest and answered in less than 140 characters - "We
       | censor because of money".
       | 
       | The only difference between old internet and new internet is
       | money and shareholders and centralization. The guy talks about
       | everything - culture, russians, old internet, etc but ignores the
       | elephant int the room. Money makes the world go round and money
       | makes social media censor. If you are dependent on ads, you
       | probably will have to conform to money's demands. I do wonder how
       | elon will deal with the problem of money/ads. Though taking the
       | company private and owning it outright should give him more
       | leeway, I doubt he's willing to lose money year after year on
       | twitter.
        
         | neilpointer wrote:
         | > Is that why they collectively banned trump. Because they
         | don't care?
         | 
         | When he says "they don't care" he's saying they [social media
         | orgs] don't care about ideology. If they did, they'd just ban
         | large swaths of people they disagree with.
         | 
         | They banned Trump because he incited a fucking riot on the
         | nation's capitol and even after seeing the consequences of this
         | incitement - in the form of a dead supporters of his and
         | potentially members of our government being killed by an angry
         | mob - Trump doubled down like he always does.
         | 
         | Yishan's entire thread boils down to "social media companies
         | don't give a shit about ideology until it manifests as an
         | actual threat to public safety". I'm confused how you weren't
         | able to glean that from his thread. When they banned Trump, he
         | had become a clear threat to basic societal order and the
         | companies decided they had a responsibility to stop assisting
         | the escalation of that threat.
         | 
         | > That must be why we censor libraries...
         | 
         | this comes across as sarcastic, not sure though. We absolutely
         | censor libraries. Currently large portions of the country are
         | obsessed with throwing out LGBT literature that kids might have
         | access to. I'm sure you can guess as to why that is.
         | 
         | > Instead of wasting pages of text and much of our time, he
         | could have been honest and answered in less than 140 characters
         | - "We censor because of money".
         | 
         | That doesn't make sense. For social media companies, engagement
         | = money and having trolls, Trump, and outrage clicks is
         | certainly more profitable than not having those things.
         | 
         | But you're right about one thing, if the entire country
         | devolved into civil war (one of the logical outcomes of letting
         | Trump's bid to overthrow a peaceful transition of power
         | continue), profits would definitely take a nosedive. Sometimes
         | good business sense aligns with doing the right thing.
        
           | qiskit wrote:
           | > They banned Trump because he incited a fucking riot on the
           | nation's capitol and even after seeing the consequences of
           | this incitement - in the form of a dead supporters of his and
           | potentially members of our government being killed by an
           | angry mob - Trump doubled down like he always does.
           | 
           | So what should happen to social media companies who supported
           | BLM and the riots that ensued? Should they be banned? What
           | about social media companies role in the color revolutions?
           | 
           | > Yishan's entire thread boils down to "social media
           | companies don't give a shit about ideology until it manifests
           | as an actual threat to public safety". I'm confused how you
           | weren't able to glean that from his thread.
           | 
           | See the above comment.
           | 
           | > We absolutely censor libraries. Currently large portions of
           | the country are obsessed with throwing out LGBT literature
           | that kids might have access to. I'm sure you can guess as to
           | why that is.
           | 
           | We talking libraries or elementary schools? Big difference.
           | 
           | > That doesn't make sense. For social media companies,
           | engagement = money and having trolls, Trump, and outrage
           | clicks is certainly more profitable than not having those
           | things.
           | 
           | It makes sense if the advertisers don't like it. Advertisers
           | aren't just interested in numbers. They are also interested
           | in branding.
           | 
           | > Sometimes good business sense aligns with doing the right
           | thing.
           | 
           | Most times good business sense aligns with doing the wrong
           | thing.
           | 
           | Just in case you were wondering. Not a fan of Trump. Not a
           | fan of the left or right.
        
             | neilpointer wrote:
             | > So what should happen to social media companies who
             | supported BLM and the riots that ensued?
             | 
             | I'm not aware of BLM having any elected leaders, but if
             | they were using social media to coordinate violence I would
             | expect them to be banned. Please let us know if you've
             | found any folks with 80m followers that have been left free
             | to coordinate violence on social media platforms. That
             | said, here's NYPost detailing a bunch of Antifa-affiliated
             | Twitter accounts being banned for coordinating/encouraging
             | violence https://nypost.com/2021/01/22/twitter-suspends-
             | antifa-accoun...
             | 
             | > We talking libraries or elementary schools? Big
             | difference.
             | 
             | Schools have libraries, it's not a big difference. But
             | don't worry, we're talking libraries too.
             | https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-
             | government/article260...
             | 
             | > Most times good business sense aligns with doing the
             | wrong thing.
             | 
             | Hence my usage of the word "sometimes".
             | 
             | > Just in case you were wondering. Not a fan of Trump. Not
             | a fan of the left or right.
             | 
             | Well now its you who could've saved us a lot of characters
             | and just said "I'm one of those guys that thinks they're
             | non-ideological, but here's my obvious rightward bias
             | anyways"
        
         | JoeJonathan wrote:
         | > The "old internet" was predominantly american ( 90%+ ) and we
         | didn't just want to protect free speech from conservatives
         | attacking porn, but from everyone ( soccer moms, woke leftist,
         | europeans, ADL, canadians, etc ).
         | 
         | No one was concerned with woke leftists in the 90s. No one.
         | "Woke" wasn't a term, and after the fall of the Soviet Union,
         | no one was worried about the corroding influence of leftists,
         | or cultural marxism, or any of the bogeymen that resurfaced
         | over the past decade.
        
           | qiskit wrote:
           | > No one was concerned with woke leftists in the 90s. No one.
           | "Woke" wasn't a term
           | 
           | I know woke wasn't a term. I grew up in the 90s. I just put
           | it in there to emphasize "everyone". Thought people would be
           | butthurt about me adding canadians/europeans, not woke
           | leftist. But the precursors of modern "woke left" certainly
           | existed in the 90s even though they didn't gain the power
           | they did after the 2007 financial crisis.
        
             | neilpointer wrote:
             | Oh wow I had no idea the Woke Leftists ran the banks and
             | private equity firms. Wild.
        
               | qiskit wrote:
               | Not just the banks and private equity. CIA, FBI, Army,
               | etc. It's crazy how the elites ( at least a significant
               | faction of them ) and the people ( at least a significant
               | faction of them ) are living in two different worlds.
        
               | neilpointer wrote:
               | ah yes, the well-known leftists of the CIA, FBI, and
               | Army. They were playing the long-game murdering all those
               | leftist governments of Central and South America, I
               | guess.
               | 
               | Maybe just give a definition of 'woke'?
        
               | specto wrote:
               | Been seeing these conspiracy "theories" on HN lately,
               | it's interesting to say the least.
        
           | psyc wrote:
           | In the 90s, we had "PC." In retrospect, it was a very mild
           | strain of what we have now.
        
       | fellowniusmonk wrote:
       | I co-ran a co-working space for many years in a zeitgeisty tech
       | city as a side thing to keep my companies rent cheap (kind of.)
       | 
       | We were early holders of bitcoin meetups, we threw crypto events,
       | we gave away schwag with those guys who 3d printed guns. We
       | hosted "Young African Leaders" events (yali) and hosted some
       | amazing people from overseas. We hosted the local 2600 meetup and
       | other maker events. We hosted the local colleges Asian chamber of
       | commerce events.
       | 
       | We threw parties with thousands of people filtering through our
       | converted warehouse space.
       | 
       | We had actual communists and unabashed capitalists and new
       | atheists and couldn't care less multi generational atheists and
       | old burnouts and young idiots, people abandoned by their
       | families, from loving families and Christians, Muslims,
       | Buddhists, Hindus.. We had classes for robotics, pickling
       | vegetables, we burned a lot of stuff and made some huge art
       | installations.
       | 
       | We kicked people out for being shitty and insulting (which was
       | extremely rare among members, totalling 3 people over many
       | years). We occasionally reprimanded people who were fine in
       | person but abusive online.
       | 
       | Hell is other people. I miss what we built and the ideas and
       | companies and the hope and economic power our members could tap
       | into.
       | 
       | But I do not miss the bad behavior, the guy who seemed cool and
       | nerdy until he gets drunk and starts trying to physically corner
       | women. The attempted rapists who came to some of our larger
       | warehouse parties and had to be removed by police.
       | 
       | The assholes who came in with bad faith arguments or the copious
       | number of bad faith actors trying to monetize our more
       | inexperienced members.
       | 
       | We were a meatspace, old internet, freedom of speech group and we
       | kept our facilities a little dingy just to keep things more maker
       | oriented and attract less of the superficial.
       | 
       | Having seen it all in person it's always the bad faith actors,
       | the predators, the non-makers and the fragile egos that come out.
       | We did a good job in person having ideological, cultural and
       | class diversity because "making" was our prime member criteria.
       | 
       | I don't see how it's possible on the internet at large. I've seen
       | many terrible people in person and at least there were
       | consequences for overtly evil or lying acts, I just don't see it
       | happening on the consumer internets social media platforms.
       | 
       | Great perspective to read about and rings very true with my years
       | "sitting at the city gates" in our modern times.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-04-15 23:02 UTC)