News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by CPLX on Thursday July 14, 2022 @09:42AM (#32095991)
The difference between the two of them is that due to historical specifics, the social media companies have Section 230, which completely immunizes them from dealing with the consequences of any of their actions.

Without that they'd be subject to the same constraints as your average newspaper or TV station. Which is to say not a lot of constraints. But there would in fact be a means to address the consequences of their editorial decisions.

Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by hackyhacky on Thursday July 14, 2022 @10:35AM (#32096581)
That's not at all a reasonable characterization of 230.

https://www.techdirt.com/2021/10/29/everything-you-know-abou...

Websites and TV stations have the same first amendment protection. The main difference is that users do not contribute content to TV stations. That's what 230 protects.

Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by cronix on Thursday July 14, 2022 @10:50AM (#32096772)
There were "public access" shows on cable that showed user generated content. Not so different than the majority of tik-tok content today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G8reRPOoiw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFBIMKdOdBg

Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by hackyhacky on Thursday July 14, 2022 @11:31AM (#32097342)
Actually, very different.

Public access was very limited in bandwidth: one simply didn't have thousands of people posting content. As a result, public access was heavily curated and subject to the same broadcast restrictions as traditional television.

Even allowing that, public access isn't much of a thing anymore. In modern mainstream television stations, there is absolutely no user-generated content.

Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by phpisthebest on Thursday July 14, 2022 @09:57AM (#32096165)
Given the clear editorial choices via moderation that the platforms have chosen to undertake I would be in favor of treating them like a newspaper of TV Station
Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by CPLX on Thursday July 14, 2022 @10:18AM (#32096382)
Yup. The second you prioritize one piece of content over another by other than an automatic means like chronological order or votes you're not presenting user generated content any more, you're making editorial decisions.

The fact that we've tolerated this for so long is appalling.

Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by hackyhacky on Thursday July 14, 2022 @11:35AM (#32097384)
The overwhelming majority of content on social media is curated by automatic means. Manual curation at that scale, is, as you know, infeasible.
Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by CPLX on Thursday July 14, 2022 @02:44PM (#32099939)
Automatic perhaps, but still editorial in the decision making process.

As soon as you start deciding to show some content and not other content based on the content of the communications you're making editorial decisions. Algorithms or not, it's a judgement call.

Re:Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her co... by hackyhacky on Thursday July 14, 2022 @11:40PM (#32104361)
Sure it is. It's also inevitable. Every communications medium makes similar judgement calls, including broadcast television, which chooses which shows to air based on their content, and which news story to cover, based on their content. Given the scale of social media, curation is a necessity.