One of Masnick's best columns in years. As I've said many times before (although most people rejected my message), the phrase 'free speech' is often deployed to shut down discussion rather than open it up. When you inquire into the speech sort of speech thet people claim is being suppressed, it frequently turns out to be about banning pornography, curtailing the organic spread of unwelcome ideas, or proposals for the suppression of people making the unwelcome speech, by means ranging from deportation to elimination.
We saw your observations on the phrase "free speech" in action when Mr Musk purchased Twitter. One of his stated goals as a "free speech absolutist" was to bring "free speech" back to Twitter. Now, Mr Musk boosts his own tweets, sells blue checks to bots, which boosts their tweets. All to virtually "shout down" any opposing opinions
And yet according to cnns analysis, Mr Musks platform is more representative of the electorate than every other site.
I think this is a kind of falling knife-type thing: the makeup of Twitter was far more liberal than conservative a few years ago and it's currently about equal, but in two more years I predict that the trend will continue and it will be far more conservative than liberal.
It's currently about equal because conservatives are no longer being deplatformed under pressure from the government.
Some liberals are deciding they don't like this new level playing field, and are encouraging people to leave for other social media sites. If they succeed, your prophecy may come true, but not for reasons of censorship (government or private).
CrimethInc. This was pure and simple censorship. Not saying that Twitter was better with their censorship of Occupy, but crimethInc was probably the one of the last US influencial left wing org on twitter, and didn't last a month. I think John Brown Gun club was also banned, but reinstated, and redneck revolution don't have such an online presence (and is quieter than the gun club about protecting LGBT rights). This calmed down recently, but still.
Perhaps, but then we should use twitter as it is today as an example of what is normal.
I see people flee to bluesky because twitter is too right wing, but given the current composition, it's those fleeing that have the wrong calibration.
It's very concerning when a large chunk of people literally believe a representative slice of the country is intolerable
In contrast, right wingers who complained that Twitter was too liberal for years are basically correct. It was disproportionately liberal for many years.
I thought that we broadly disagreed with mainstream media, and generally viewed it with suspicion. Gell-Mann amnesia, anyone?
While I think the editorial take of most mainstream media is crap, I'm not sure I believe their data is made up.
What about when they quote data from academic studies or think tanks? Do you trust those numbers?
When it comes to straightforward data such as self reported political affiliations of active Twitter users, yes I usually do, unless I have reason to distrust.
how credulous of you.
Believe it or not .. we can all agree on the facts but have different conclusions. Such things make life interesting