MILLS' MUSINGS: The real problem with social media

 By Jarrod Mills Staff Writer

https://www.thetimestribune.com/news/local_news/mills-musings-the-real-problem-with-social-media/article_66f28095-d281-527b-9610-8e578e456725.html

If you’ve read my columns in the past you may have realized I don’t care much for social media. As I’ve pointed out, I believe people become desensitized hiding behind a keyboard and screen, and the anonymity social media brings for some allows them to spout nonsense and vitriol all with the purpose of getting a rise out of people.

I choose to treat social media like I do most things: with a pinch of salt. You have to with the vast number of users each of the main social media platforms have, and the countless number of opinions they bring with them. We all know that just because something is posted on Facebook or Twitter, it doesn’t mean it’s necessarily true.

I was taught in school to check sources and to do my homework before taking anything as gospel. I’d like to think that most people do, but we all have that one person on our friends list who shares a “news article” from a sketchy website trying to prove a point. And while I roll my eyes whenever those posts popup on my timeline, it doesn’t really bother me all that much. If they want to share garbage, let them share garbage. It’s their right, or so I thought.

Apparently Facebook and Twitter have taken it into their own hands on deciding what is “garbage” and what is not. Because that’s what we need, more corporations telling us what is true and what is false.

Why is it multi-million (billion?) dollar companies think they know what’s best for people? When did we decide that those with loaded bank accounts who are out of touch with reality get to be the gatekeepers of truth? And when did we decide that algorithms and strangers need to hold our hands and protect us from “fake news” while perusing social media? I’m an adult, I don’t need a babysitter to watch over me while I ignore the 10,000 photos uploaded of people’s children on my timeline.

If you have no idea what I’m referring to, last week both giants of the social media game, Facebook and Twitter, blocked the New York Post (one of America’s top-5 largest newspapers in circulation) from publishing a story regarding Joe Biden and his son Hunter. I’m not going to get into the specifics of the story, I really don’t want that drama, but needless to say, it didn’t paint them in a positive light.

This isn’t anything new for Facebook, who often times slows down the spread of “controversial” stories, so that third-party fact checkers can validate what’s being said in each story. Ever posted something and have a little pop-up saying something along the lines of, “this information may be partially false” or just flat out wrong? That’s because some “third-party fact checker” said so.

Twitter has said it wasn’t the content of the story that was the issue, but rather the fact that some personal information about the story’s subjects, including email addresses and the like, were the reasons the story was blocked from being shared on its website.

The Twitter account for the Republican members of the House of Judiciary Committee put out a tweet saying that it had posted a copy of the story on its own website and provided a link. Twitter is now preventing its users from posting that link, as well.

There is no secret that those from Silicon Valley generally have a left-leaning point of view, and I have no problem with that. Like I said, believe what you want to believe. What I have a problem with is that it seems to be the censoring of stories or posts that don’t align with their beliefs. Especially when you consider the other stuff that seems to slip through the cracks.

If you want to have an Orwellian hold on what gets published on your website, at least make it fair. Censoring one side only drums up animosity and gives them proof for the animosity they hold towards the other side of the aisle.

And sure, both Facebook and Twitter are privately owned companies and therefore are allowed to control what is published on their platforms. But if you’re going to do that, own it. Don’t cower behind “third-party fact checkers” and terms of services that only apply to when you want them to.

_________________________________________________________________________

QUESTION OF THE DAY:

Do you agree with the author's assessment of Social Media, or do you believe some censorship and fact checking is appropriate to prevent or reduce the amount of false information or fake news being promoted?








Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

Image
Here’s what Russia’s 2020 disinformation operations look like, according to two experts on social media and propaganda. By   DARREN LINVILL   &   PATRICK WARREN Internet trolls don’t troll. Not the professionals at least. Professional trolls don’t go on social media to antagonize liberals or belittle conservatives. They are not narrow minded, drunk or angry. They don’t lack basic English language skills. They certainly aren’t  “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,”  as the president once put it. Your stereotypical trolls do exist on social media, but the amateurs aren’t a threat to Western democracy. Professional trolls, on the other hand, are the tip of the spear in the new digital, ideological battleground. To combat the threat they pose, we must first understand them — and take them seriously. MORE: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/ Posted by Jamie B.
Read more

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Image
The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term   (Photo: Photos: Getty Images) Americans will almost certainly go to bed on Nov. 3 without knowing who won the presidential election. Since millions of people will vote by mail, constraints on time and resources will slow ballot counting into potentially a weeks-long process. Voting patterns suggest it’s likely that President  Donald Trump  could end Election Day in the lead in certain key states, only to be overtaken by Democratic opponent  Joe Biden  when more votes are tallied.  This could create a nightmare scenario during the three months stretching from Election Day to the Jan. 20 inauguration: a battle on the state and congressional level over who is the legitimate winner. This could include Congress reconvening on Jan. 6, presided over by Vice President  Mike Pence , with no consensus over its potential role in choosing the next president. This is arguably the most likely of th
Read more

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices

Image
Here is an interesting question in my list of philosophical questions: 1.) Should governments have penalties for those who live unhealthy lifestyles? A list of unhealthy lifestyles would include things like smoking, drinking, illegal drugs, prostitution, and other “vice” type activities. I guess the “government penalties” would be referring to monetary punishments, withholding medical treatments (insurance companies would love that), possibly imposing/regulating very high (exorbitant) prices on things considered unhealthy in order to cut down on their use, and other possibilities. 2.) Or, would you say that living an unhealthy lifestyle, likely resulting in a LOT of eventual personal pain and suffering, should be punishment enough for unhealthy lifestyles? When people make bad choices in life, often in their youth where ignorance and immediate gratification takes them over,  3.) Should a society be obligated to help "fix" them, by way of tax money?   Is that part of
Read more