Metamorphosis.
Mark Zuckerberg’s transition into a bro is now complete.
Meta announced sweeping changes to their content moderation protocols this week. Fact-checking is out, community notes are in. Censorship is out, free speech is in. Nick Clegg is out, Dana White is in. That last one may actually be the most telling. We’re sure it’s just a coincidence that Mr. White is a good buddy of the POTUS-in-waiting.
Opinion is divided. On the one hand, this could be seen as a knee-bending, ring-kissing display of obeisance to the new Trump administration in an act of cynical corporate self-preservation. On the other hand, it’s hard to think of many examples throughout history in which the people censoring speech were ‘the good guys’. Granted, this means more ‘bad stuff’ will appear on Meta’s platforms. But surely freedom of speech isn’t only supposed to protect nice speech which we all like – I’d be out of a job. And do we really want social media platforms as the arbiters of truth? This change may be craven, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t correct.
So, what we saying? Is it cool? Is it sh*t? Is this really a return to the-artist-formerly-known-as-Facebook’s founding principles? Are Meta responding to a genuine shift in public opinion, or are they being blown by the capricious winds of political and pecuniary opportunism? Have your say – and feel free to make that say as rude as you like, because nobody can stop you now.
Read Original Story