An essential read from the former
research manager of Stanford’s Internet Observatory, on how spreaders of misinformation (people who have been deceived) and disinformation (people who know they’re lying) view even *labelling* a post as misinformation as censorship.
More … 🧵
Trolling + misinformation requires an audience: so when rather than responding, I simply block, they also perceive that as censorship.
This latest accusation, for example, claims that, as a university professor, I am a public official and hence shouldn’t be allowed to block anyone on social media.
Schellenberger and a bunch or crazy people are holding an event in Dublin on Free Speech (they're freaking out as the upcoming Irish hate speech laws may mean consequences for their awfulness)
It's only censorship if the item is invisible to everyone. Pointing out that a statement is wrong with supporting evidence is the only way we advance in society.
There needs to be a determination ( that both the right and the left ) decides is misinformation and not censorship. However , some people have difficulty with “truth “ when it hurts their reelection prospects
This is a fantastic article, and one of the best things it does is explain how folks who have benefited from the manipulation of online platforms have successfully equated any effort to address that manipulation as “censorship.”
Under the constitution, lies are given the same legal protection as truth. That's probably unchangeable, but we need to break the habit of therefore treating lies and liars as worthy of the same respect as truths and honest actors. Decorum here is dangerous.