Zuckerberg announces changes to free speech on Meta (including the topic of gender)

I think it's their US-based fact check teams that are being stood down - who presumably concentrated on content originating in the US/based on US media. So it's not that we'll get fact-checked content and the US will get the same stuff without checks.

Blatant sexism and misogyny were never out on FB - it was built in from the start, and their algorithms and mods have never had a problem with rape threats, images of women who been attacked etc. Reports of that type of content have always been met with 'doesn't break our community standards'.

How could this be implemented if true?

The members of Meta’s Oversight Board will now have to either stand up for the new policy on human-rights grounds or resign. At the very least they, and the rest of the human-rights establishment, will have to talk seriously about a subject they have spent years trying to avoid.

When being interviewed this morning, Helle Thornint-Schmidt specifically said the one issue the Board was concerned about was trans / LGBTQ++

Apparently no worries about a surge in misogynistic hate directed at women. Because the internet is such a friendly place for women and girls.

Great news, a sign of the times

Didn't somebody say upthread that this new policy only applied in the US? Is that correct? The SM piece doesn't mention it.

Not sure if this has been posted. In case anyone is interested in what Sex Matters thinks!

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/meta-pledges-to-stop-censoring-gender-critical-speech/

Its not just that the tech bros rule the internet but increasingly the IRL world.

This is becoming an even bigger problem with AI.

Chat GPT leans TRA, for example.

Just to add I think what has been anounced is not about principles or whatever, but a measure of how someone who wants to make even more money than they used to, is making sure he is on the right side of Trump.

Also worth remember that twitte X is one of the least used social media platforms. So what goes on there is by and large irrelevant.

It is only relevant when MSM totally over hypes what is happening there. And it is them that creates the problems. Because barring MSM why would anyone stay on it.

ie Facebook has 3065 million users. Twitter has 611.

Much of what is happening is meda manipulation to make us feel certain things aren't important, and others are. In practice twitter is irrelevant and of little use. But the MSM makes some, who knows why, think they need to be part of this tiny puddle of dirt.

But the dominance of Facebook is more concerning, accept that very few people use it to make flashy statements, and attract lots of likes and shares.

Most people only post to friends etc..

Or, as discussed in PP, are part of groups where theoretically they have signed up to share and discuss with those with similar instances. And mainly when these groups go wrong isn't about Facebook itself, but because someone or more than one gets control of the group through taking over the admin role. And as this also happens in real life not sure Facebook can be blamed for entryists.

And as has been mentioned up thread, how commercial companies use facebook is quite often meaningless, or of little value to users.

But agains the statistics I have found that many news programmes no longer maintain a facebook page. And I think that's because they got much more detailed and well thoughtout responses. And they didn't want that.

So in terms of the virtual world what goes on on facebook is more important in terms of reach etc.. And although said to be mainly used by an older age group, clearly has not lost it being far and away the mass leader.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/

Much as I hate a lot of the shouting and look at me, look at me, content of twitter etc., I think what is far more alarming is how search engines have been politicised. And are actually less functional.

So its not just that you cant rely on going to wikkipedia to check facts (because content is manipulated), but now using searches for facts will be hampered by the algoriths they use.

ie instead of a purely search by topic and date, you are fed sponsored content, and maybe even worse, they promote what have been previously popular results.

So information is now skewed in favour of popular rather than accurate.

Agreed. Trump got voted in, gender ideology is finally getting unpopular press, immigration is a huge topic, people are now going to X so they can speak freely and all of a sudden he's become aware of the error of his ways. Self serving! But at least it opens up a platform for free speech.

I know there are automated deletions, but even these aren't systematically applied. ie I have been able to share posts that others have had deleted. (Not that I believe that tech is infallable.)

That's why I suspect that there are a huge % that are because of individuals, or even networks of people reporting posts.

You said we’ve had a whole bunch of ridiculous deletions

How can you be sure that a % aren't because of posts being reported?

Your admin rule would be irrelevant to that happening.

I understand you cant, dont want to talk about a fb group that could identify it, but if it isn't about contentious issues, with "triggering" words that the algorithms might pick up, its as likely if not more, to be members who have other motives for reporting.

Pronouns: Y'all; Me all; He/she/they all

Yes! I think this is very similar to the problem of rootless international companies floating about to wherever the nearest tax haven or very rich people buying up passports and sort of floating around the world to wherever the standard of living is good (because of other people's taxes usually) but where taxes for them are relatively low. It is the same phenomena but occurring within America. Thanks for pointing it out!

What's 'living like a Texan'? Is it like 'living as a woman', except more hat-based?

I thought moving to Texas very interesting, a very different local workforce perhaps?

There's been an exodus from California to Texas for a while businesses and workers - I think it's to do with Tax and regulation environments and a perception of a decline in California - everything form school to insurance companies quietly leaving the state and workers like the lower cost of living compared to California.

There have been raised concerns round voting practises - it hit our media ages ago when some Republicans wanted waits to gain voting rights - but think that went nowhere fears and it was around influx would vote for polices causing problems they were fleeing.

I though community notices were working well on X - even on you tube people get called out for being inaccurate by other creators and public. It's clearly been done as Trump is coming into power again - and possibly to save them money.

I think it will depend how it ends up working TBH.

https://www.pods.com/blog/moving-to-texas-from-california

https://eu.statesman.com/story/news/state/2024/04/18/texas-to-california-moving-relocation-2022-us-census-bureau-population/73367615007/

Absolutely mad because what they were writing was harmful - ways to kill the poor hoverfly 🥹

I thought that reducing moderation was awful when I first heard it - a Trump presidency with zero fact checking….. But the first comment from the Oversight Board is about the impact on the trans (no)debate - so there it is. Well done Zuckerberg for recognising the damage that censorship is doing around this ‘debate’

The same can be said of lots of immigrants the world over @UtopiaPlanitia - just in this case they're internal immigrants!

going back to like went he was in college/slam books because he is a incel and his friends could not get a date

Yes, I’ve heard Texans complaining that wealthy Californians moving to Texas are gentrifying areas of the state to make them just like the state they left instead of living in Texas as it already is 🤷‍♀️ Why move to Texas and try to live in the same way as the state you left? Other than tax breaks from the Texas legislature, I can’t understand moving there and refusing to live the way Texans do.

It is a strange world where thinking is determined by who is good and who is bad.

So Trump, terfs, the silicon valley super rich, etc are bad so anything they believe in is bad. Indeed why not lump them all together as "the far right".

I hope we are entering a more nuanced age where we recognise that people like Musk or Zuckerberg are bright and can have good ideas/arguments, but that their lives and experiences are different, as they are sheltered from so many things others struggle with.

So they can absolutely, like about 98% of the world, know what a woman is. They can be concerned about the world their children are growing up into. They are also capable of extraordinary innovation. But ego and privilege may prevent them from being great politicians and policy makers.

Each to their own. They should be listened to, but not slavishly followed. No one should be slavishly followed. Not even Stonewall.

Or...
Having wreaked havoc on California, the silicon valley super rich are now moving to a new State in which to wreak havoc.

An alternative angle.

Perhaps Zukerberg's kids are a bit older (the eldest is 10) and he, and his doctor wife, are starting to realise that affluent Californian schools are nurturing grounds for gender woo and more.

They want more security and protection for their kids. Meta is not the only firm that is moving to Texas or Arizona. The tech generation is growing up, and outgrowing both California and the democrats in their current enfeebled form.

Well said!