Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, August 03, 2021

Major social media sites failed to remove 84% of antisemitic posts reported to them using their own tools, according to a report released Monday.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article...

...Platforms failed to act on 89% of posts promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories regarding the 9/11 terror attacks, the COVID-19 pandemic and Jewish control of world affairs. A further 80% of posts containing Holocaust denial were not removed along with 74% of posts alleging blood libel, 70% of racist caricatures and 70% of posts using neo-Nazi imagery.

It found that Facebook performed the worst out of the five platforms, failing to remove 89% of the flagged posts despite updating its hate speech policy to ban Holocaust denial in October. ...


#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-08-03 10:50 AM | Reply

So? Free speech, man.

#2 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2021-08-03 02:46 PM | Reply

@#2

The First Amendment does not apply to how private companies treat their users/customers.

That aside, it is ironic that the Conservatives often howl about how they are censored by social media sites, apparently trying to play the victim.

#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-08-03 03:38 PM | Reply

"Platforms failed to act on 89% of posts promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories regarding the 9/11 terror attacks, the COVID-19 pandemic and Jewish control of world affairs. A further 80% of posts containing Holocaust denial were not removed along with 74% of posts alleging blood libel, 70% of racist caricatures and 70% of posts using neo-Nazi imagery."

There are likely multiple reasons for this. One is that many things that social media users consider and report as anti-Semitic are not actually anti-Semitic. For example, criticism of a specific country (such as Israel) is not necessarily anti-Semitic; the display and use of indigenous swastika symbols, like in this story, is not anti-Semitic.

Another is that no corporation, not even "big tech" companies, are willing to invest the type of money some people expect them to to hire and train live moderators who can discern the context and tell whether there's sarcasm or irony involved. At best they'll outsource it to non-native speakers who follow a cookie cutter template to decide whether something should me removed, so they might as well be bots.

Finally, many companies have backed off on aggressively moderating "hate speech", because when they do police it then they get a lot of complaints from the people demanding it when the rules are also applied to them.

#4 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-08-03 04:14 PM | Reply

Although apparently some people want to live in a dystopian nightmare like [...], where internet content is constantly being monitored and policed by ISPs and can now be linked to one's social credit score.

#5 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-08-04 05:37 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort