News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on California bill would let parents sue social media companies for addicting kids. Parent comment

Re:California bill would let parents sue social media compan... by parkingrift on Thursday March 17, 2022 @03:42AM (#30708581)
>The amount of people trying to assign social media companies the role of "publisher", responsible for everything that happens on their platform, is absurd.

It’s simple. Either users have absolute control over the content that they see, or the social media companies are publishers.

Go to YouTube. Log out. What do you see? It’s not nothing. They’ve decided what to show you.

Tech and social media companies are algorithmically dictating what you see and hiding behind the fact that it’s not “their content.” Why is this considered different from a news site which exclusively hosts opinion pieces from independent journalists?

This is before we even get into editorializing, which is now common on every major social media platform. Not only are social media platforms dictating what you see but also they are editorializing that content before you see. And yet somehow they aren’t publishers, because reasons.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California bill would let parents sue social media compan... by runeks on Thursday March 17, 2022 @05:37AM (#30709262)
> Tech and social media companies are algorithmically dictating what you see and hiding behind the fact that it’s not “their content.” Why is this considered different from a news site which exclusively hosts opinion pieces from independent journalists?

They're considered different because the news site doesn’t have an “upload article”-button that lets anyone host an article of their choice on the news site in question.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California bill would let parents sue social media compan... by Nextgrid on Thursday March 17, 2022 @07:13AM (#30709806)
This doesn't matter in practice - the upload button you see on YouTube will never get you on the front page.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California bill would let parents sue social media compan... by johnnyanmac on Sunday March 20, 2022 @06:23AM (#30741507)
neither does editorials that news sites approve and publish. Are we suggesting (on a site with point based sorting nonetheless) that curation is an inherently manipulative strategy on the internet with terabytes of content created per day?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California bill would let parents sue social media compan... by parkingrift on Thursday March 17, 2022 @08:03AM (#30710185)
>They're considered different because the news site doesn’t have an “upload article”-button that lets anyone host an article of their choice on the news site in question.

Social media companies don’t let anyone post about anything they want, either. They’ll ban you for not following their rules.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California bill would let parents sue social media compan... by runeks on Thursday March 17, 2022 @05:27AM (#30709221)
> It’s simple. Either users have absolute control over the content that they see, or the social media companies are publishers.

> Go to YouTube. Log out. What do you see? It’s not nothing. They’ve decided what to show you.

Help me understand: if a content platform has a “suggestions” view, then they are publishers? Or only if this view cannot be hidden by the user?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California bill would let parents sue social media compan... by parkingrift on Thursday March 17, 2022 @08:10AM (#30710241)
>Help me understand: if a content platform has a “suggestions” view, then they are publishers? Or only if this view cannot be hidden by the user?

The former.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California bill would let parents sue social media compan... by nova22033 on Thursday March 17, 2022 @06:21AM (#30709509)
Not only are social media platforms dictating what you see but also they are editorializing that content before you see. And yet somehow they aren’t publishers, because reasons.

You are forced to go to their site everyday because reasons

[ Parent | on HN ]