Mark Zuckerberg's MAGA conversion is complete as he tears up the internet and remakes it in Trump's image.
I really feel that headlines such as this from the dailyfail are part of the problem, The changes apply to Facebook and Instagram, while I acknowledge they are very popular and have billions of users the internet is more then just these two platforms.
Problem is big tech gets directly corrolated ( if that is the right word here ) to technology, so Windows is the default OS, Office is the default, Teams and zoom are default for video conferencing, The language used seems to alter our brains on a subliminal level to make us think there are no other alternatives or as the FSF would put that replacements.
I think independent platforms, websites and the Fediverse are going to be far more important over the next few years, or even beyond.
@zleap thinking of Trump's threats, it might be coercion rather than a conversion. See https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/28/trump-zuckerberg-election-book-00176639
@NetMassimo the
There is certainly something going on here, both the EU/UK have now got laws to try and reign in social media, so it is meant to be safer, Australia has banned under 16s from using social media. This in the view of Trump harms America, and from big tech bosses view point it harms them. So this is a chance to get in to bed with Trump and do something about it, fight back, President trump has the power to threaten sanctions, taffifs and make it much harder for countries or businesses to operate within the US, where as the EU needs the agreement of about 27 nations, it takes time, Trump can just do things very quickly. It takes long enough to pass some laws in the UK.
Trump is good at opening his mouth and getting what he wants as he is a bully and countries can either cower down in terror and give in or stand up and say NO to him, then face the consequences.
So yes, by removing moderation you change the status quo as to how content is presented, this benefits Trumps maga supporters, anti vaccination and anti climate rhetoric,
By ensuring social media companies can't also be sued over content you create a environment where one group of people can say / post what they want with no consequences or anyone held to account.
Isn't the whole point of moderation to step in before harmful content goes out to the wider user base, as I said before given the stories from the moderators, we could see a lot of nasty / illegal and harmful content which cannot be unseen.
This could be the unintended consquence, of trying to give more of a voice to the anti vaccination groups or climate deniers, which I think is the intention here. Most people can view a post that says climate change is fake news and ignore it.
