SURVEY: Removal of info from Social Media -- Censorship or Not?

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

[Chomper Higgot]

33 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I disagree with this assertion. I think IQ or intelligence is all about making connections in one's mind. Make enough connections and you can discern what is false and indeed discover that something is missing in the narrative.

IQ is an ability to process information (make connections if you wish).

 

IQ is an innate ability which we are each born with, it doesn’t increase and can reduce.

 

It is also only part of the equation, personality plays a roll, for example some people stubbornly resist new ideas while others relish the same.

 

Psychology plays a part, particularly where an individual’s Psychology is damaged. 

 

And of course there are biases duch such as religion/political allegiances.

 

It is for this reason the internet content providers, advertisers and propaganda merchants spend time money and effort identifying individual personality traits that they then use to target messages/information tailored to the personality.

 

An increasing amount of the information you see on social media and that is presented to you on the internet is already manipulated to suit  your online personality and identifiable biases.

[manarak]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But yes I agree the rules should be explicit and published ( TVF does a great job in this respect).

My Opinion on this is that there definitely is room for improvement.

[scorecard]

23 hours ago, simple1 said:

An excellent example of a fake news social media post asking for exemption on the basis of Free Speech.

 

Western security agencies have often warned the public about posting divisive content. In today's world I do not agree such false content should be permitted as it is proven to lead to violence by some groups.

 

Unfortunately the so called leader of the free world is a daily offender for abuse of access to social media.

 Nice post.

 

IMHO there should be free speech however it comes with responsibilities.

 

'... comes with responsibilities. ...'   is unfortunately where the devil is in the detail and application etc.

 

[atyclb]

8 hours ago, sirineou said:

9 hours ago, atyclb said:

 

therefore what is the threshold IQ required to be able to discern between propaganda and truth?

 

did you mean "discern" rather than "discriminate"?

 

is is not possible for some propaganda to contain some truth and vice a versa ?

all successful propaganda contains an element of truth. Propaganda  resides not on what you are being told but on what you are not being told, and all the IQ in the world will not help you consider that which you dont know 

 

 

so i guess polpot was wrong when he assumed the educated people were a threat and should be marked for execution.

 

it doesnt require all the iq in the world to analyze things and or events and realize things dont add up. add in knowledge of hard sciences (physics, math, chemistry) and things get more interesting.

 

although the case of einstein is a bit extreme, many fellow physicists balked at his theories and had the timing been different he may had been labeled a "conspiracy theorist" . imagine those atoms and subatomic particles banding together over time to change matter. 

[Berkshire]

It's only censorship if it's government sponsored.  And in fact, the government (US) does do a fair amount of censoring such as porn, certain words on national TV, classified material, tobacco commercials on TV, certain words when boarding a plane, etc.  The public has come to accept that, so there's no such thing as pure freedom of speech no matter what.  Doesn't exist.

 

But one can argue that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc. are exercising THEIR first amendment rights by not allowing objectionable material on their platforms, including fake news, hate speech, etc.   I commend them. 

[atyclb]

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

9 hours ago, atyclb said:

 

therefore what is the threshold IQ required to be able to discern between propaganda and truth?

 

did you mean "discern" rather than "discriminate"?

 

is is not possible for some propaganda to contain some truth and vice a versa ?

I meant discern.

 

The most effective propaganda laces lies around a truth. It may be extremely difficult to discern such messages/news as propaganda.

 

 

still looking forward to your idea of the "threshold IQ' needed to discriminate discern between propaganda and truth

[watcharacters]

On 8/26/2018 at 10:53 AM, Credo said:

 

On 8/26/2018 at 10:59 AM, atyclb said:

 

 

free tissues should be supplied to all precious snowflakes so they can wipe their tears be they at work, school or in their "safe space"

 

Why should the tissues be FREE?

Edited August 27, 2018 by watcharacters

[Chomper Higgot]

28 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

 

still looking forward to your idea of the "threshold IQ' needed to discriminate discern between propaganda and truth

Perhaps the answer is in the reason you’re having trouble grappling with the idea.

 

Here’s a clue:

 

The methods used to determine IQ rely upon presenting the subject with problems of varying complexity and seeing which ones they can and cannot fathom.

Edited August 27, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[atyclb]

23 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Apart from the fact half the population have an IQ of 100 or less and are very susceptible to propaganda.

 

They lack the intellectual bandwidth to discriminate propaganda and truth.

 

i am simply asking you what the threshold iq is to be able to discern propaganda from truth?   per your quote above is it . "100 or less" ?

 

as you can see theres only 10 countries with an average iq of 101 or more. the vast majority fall at 100 or less.

[off road pat]

Hmm,..I remember A leftist newspaper in France wrote a article with lots of verified details about a corrupt politician a few years ago! The newspaper was condemned to pay a high amount of money to that politician !!! just a short time later that Politician was condemned for corruption in another case. It was then discovered that the first newspaper was completely right in it's article !!!

My taught is, what and who is to decide who right and who is wrong ?!?!? what is wrong today could very well be right tomorrow ?! And vice versa.

Edited August 27, 2018 by off road pat

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, off road pat said:

Hmm,..I remember A leftist newspaper in France wrote a article with lots of verified details about a corrupt politician a few years ago! The newspaper was condemned to pay a high amount of money to that politician !!! just a short time later that Politician was condemned for corruption in another case. It was then discovered that the first newspaper was completely right in it's article !!!

My taught is, what and who is to decide who right and who is wrong ?!?!? what is wrong today could very well be right tomorrow ?! And vice versa.

The truth was always the truth, it didn’t change.

[off road pat]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The truth was always the truth, it didn’t change.

Well, the newspaper was condemned to publish the truth ! which was revealed later. The truth is not always recognised as such !!!

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, atyclb said:

 

i am simply asking you what the threshold iq is to be able to discern propaganda from truth?   per your quote above is it . "100 or less" ?

 

as you can see theres only 10 countries with an average iq of 101 or more. the vast majority fall at 100 or less.

IQ is ‘normally distributed’ the ‘mean’ average is the center of the distribution and therefore half the population have an IQ of equal to or less than the mean, the other half an IQ of equal to or more than the mean.

 

Nobody is claiming there is an IQ below which people are unable to discern propaganda or lies, the unarguable fact is people with higher a IQ are better intellectually equipped to do so than people with lower a lower IQ.

 

However other factors play a part, personality, psychological health, and political/religious/cultural bias.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, off road pat said:

Well, the newspaper was condemned to publish the truth ! which was revealed later. The truth is not always recognised as such !!!

Presumably the newspaper could not prove its allegations at the time of first publishing them.

[Scott]

7 hours ago, off road pat said:

Hmm,..I remember A leftist newspaper in France wrote a article with lots of verified details about a corrupt politician a few years ago! The newspaper was condemned to pay a high amount of money to that politician !!! just a short time later that Politician was condemned for corruption in another case. It was then discovered that the first newspaper was completely right in it's article !!!

My taught is, what and who is to decide who right and who is wrong ?!?!? what is wrong today could very well be right tomorrow ?! And vice versa.

There is a difference between defamation and libel and something being fake.   The laws on defamation vary from country to country.   It doesn't mean it's fake/false, but it is a legal allegation that needs to be proven.  

 

[Walter Travolta]

23 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

Censorship no, ignore list, yes. You will note if you follow the reactions of the poster you responded to that he is "confused" by almost every post he reads. Don't waste your time trying to interact with people of such low cognitive ability.

Couldn't agree more, there are certain members that spend their life on here. The same usual suspects who hate being shown up or proven wrong by some straight talking guy like me. When you spend all day and night scrolling through newsfeeds in the hope you can make yourself look more intelligent by opposing straight forward facts is quite unintelligent. When said person continues to cling on the debate in hope you say something they can pounce on, is even more sad. What is even worse is when one of these members tries spinning what you have said to make you look racist or fascist or far right or anti gay or anti women or anti anything that isnt me hahaha bless them. You know the ones, the ones that want you banned form everything so you cannot have a voice. What they fail to understand is that when all the opposing voices have disappeared, they have no-one to debate with haha not really a good outcome for trolls but thats how they operate ?

Nice to know Im not the only one who notices this

 

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

 

[Chomper Higgot]

There is an issue around ‘incomplete’ information around breaking news stories that is often characterized as media/government censorship but also becomes a ‘seed’ for speculation, which in itself becomes a false narrative.

 

We frequently see this here on TVF, were news of a violent incident is reported along with ‘details to follow’ illicets speculation and accusations of ‘information being withheld’

 

 Likewise reports from on going court cases in which the law requires names and personal details to be withheld illicit accusations of ‘censorship’.

 

TVF might easily tackle the first by closing such early report news to comments until fuller details are available.

 

Tackling people’s ignorance of the law or court procedure is not so easy if they’re unwilling themselves to fix it.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There is an issue around ‘incomplete’ information around breaking news stories that is often characterized as media/government censorship but also becomes a ‘seed’ for speculation, which in itself becomes a false narrative.

 

We frequently see this here on TVF, were news of a violent incident is reported along with ‘details to follow’ illicets speculation and accusations of ‘information being withheld’

 

 Likewise reports from on going court cases in which the law requires names and personal details to be withheld illicit accusations of ‘censorship’.

 

TVF might easily tackle the first by closing such early report news to comments until fuller details are available.

 

Tackling people’s ignorance of the law or court procedure is not so easy if they’re unwilling themselves to fix it.

 

Wholesale blocking of comments might result in allegations of conspiracy (see Tommy Robinson topics for reference, if such is needed). There's no easy of tackling any of these issues, and it's fair enough to say that there's always some trade-off between freedom and security.

[Chomper Higgot]

23 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Wholesale blocking of comments might result in allegations of conspiracy (see Tommy Robinson topics for reference, if such is needed). There's no easy of tackling any of these issues, and it's fair enough to say that there's always some trade-off between freedom and security.

I’m not suggesting wholesale blocking of comments, but withholding comments to breaking news until there’s more information than a headline would cut out a great of speculation and blame mongering.

 

I would never advocate considering the conspiracy theories of the racist Yaxely-Lennon and his followers as a reason to do or not do anything.

 

[Edit] Though I am encouraged by Yaxley-Lennon’s recent support for the Niko Deffence League.

Edited August 28, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[Morch]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m not suggesting wholesale blocking of comments, but withholding comments to breaking news until there’s more information than a headline would cut out a great of speculation and blame mongering.

 

I would never advocate considering the conspiracy theories of the racist Yaxely-Lennon and his followers as a reason to do or not do anything.

 

Point made is that this would probably have a similar effect as described with regard to lack of details on breaking news stories. Essentially, if one is into conspiracy theories, pretty much anything can be made to fit the "pattern".

[wabothai]

On 8/26/2018 at 3:11 AM, BuaBS said:

 

But no there shouldn't be censorship on social media and youtube . What is happening now months before the US elections is appalling. Whether it is fake news or not , people like Alex Jones/infowars and other conservative voices shouldn't be removed .

Social media should be forced to keep free speech . Again appalling what is happening in europe , censoring everything about "migrant" crimes .

 

"Social media should be forced......".  Contradictio in terminus.

"censoring everything about 'migrant' crimes......."  Total lie.

[Walter Travolta]

18 hours ago, Walter Travolta said:

Couldn't agree more, there are certain members that spend their life on here. The same usual suspects who hate being shown up or proven wrong by some straight talking guy like me. When you spend all day and night scrolling through newsfeeds in the hope you can make yourself look more intelligent by opposing straight forward facts is quite unintelligent. When said person continues to cling on the debate in hope you say something they can pounce on, is even more sad. What is even worse is when one of these members tries spinning what you have said to make you look racist or fascist or far right or anti gay or anti women or anti anything that isnt me hahaha bless them. You know the ones, the ones that want you banned form everything so you cannot have a voice. What they fail to understand is that when all the opposing voices have disappeared, they have no-one to debate with haha not really a good outcome for trolls but thats how they operate ?

Nice to know Im not the only one who notices this

 

Chomper are you stalking me? There is a PM option if there is anything private you want to ask me

[Guest]

Somewhat related to the topic. 

 

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, Walter Travolta said:

Chomper are you stalking me? There is a PM option if there is anything private you want to ask me

I assure you I give you a lot less thought than your post above indicates you give me.

 

I’ll decline your invite to PM if you don’t mind, this is not a dating site.

[Walter Travolta]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I assure you I give you a lot less thought than your post above indicates you give me.

 

I’ll decline your invite to PM if you don’t mind, this is not a dating site.

Stop stalking me then, not much to ask? ?

[bristolboy]

On 8/27/2018 at 12:46 PM, Walter Travolta said:

Couldn't agree more, there are certain members that spend their life on here. The same usual suspects who hate being shown up or proven wrong by some straight talking guy like me.

If you do say so yourself.

[Scott]

A baiting post removed.  

 

[bristolboy]

On 8/27/2018 at 12:46 PM, Walter Travolta said:

When you spend all day and night scrolling through newsfeeds in the hope you can make yourself look more intelligent by opposing straight forward facts is quite unintelligent. 

In other words, when somebody uses facts to undermine your use of truthiness.