Musk is a fascist who promotes damaging lies and amplifies them. X is a vehicle for much damaging of the public sphere. I guess you must really love them nazis! Trying to defend them by standards they wd never adhere to. J D Vance made the same point about Trump’s damaging claims he won the 2020 election. All in the name of “free speech.” This is the moral equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater. And Musk is a repeat offender. That is not free speech but something akin to linguistic terrorism.
> On Oct 11, 2024, at 9:12 AM, Cade Diehm via nettime-l > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi nettime, > > In the years to come, the digital rights community will need to answer for > the conflation of free speech of a democratic society with the formats and > operations of the private platforms for which we interact on. > > Indeed, the US-borne legal stance enshrined by Section 230 — that the > platform is (within reason) not broadly responsible for the content of what > its users post — is something that should be heeded by the wider democratic > world. But what continues to be missed is the interface as it relates to > speech: the editorialised algorithmic timeline, the scaffolds that dictate > and shape platform speech (be it short form video, 200 characters, or > pictures with filters), or what one must give up in order to participate. > > Turns out, all of these properties are just as important in the context of > speech, and how they shape what is said, who gets to say it, and how they say > it. And yet, beyond meandering gestures towards interoperability by the EU, > or the endless protest by NGOs against endless social-media accelerated > genocides, we widely continue to equate the platform with the speech. The two > could not be further from each other. > > Put simply, the democratic enshrinement of free speech is the cloak that has > successfully kept these controllers of discourse firmly in the seats of > power. That has been the mantra, to attack the platform is to attack speech > itself, what a convenient reality for these now-juggernaughts! > > Forgive me, but in 2024 this kind of free speech discourse rings as hollow as > Musks' facile speech absolutism. A digitalised democracy must evolve beyond > the infantile technolibertariancore EFF understanding of free speech, where > the platform and its designed constraints and rules are invisible to the > demands of a free press. There is a very real accelerationist attack underway > that leverages this very flaw in the 30+ years of digital discourse, driven > by a flaw we have all perpetuated to varying degrees. Killing a platform for > being run by a Epstein-adjacent hyper-criminal who once flashed a woman on an > aeroplane and then offered to buy her a horse is not the same as kicking in > the doors of citizens who post on the platform owned by Epstein-adjacent > hyper-criminal who once flashed a woman on an aeroplane and then offered to > buy her a horse. Frankly I'm tired of the claims that these are one and the > same. > > I am not an authoritarian, I don't give a fuck about the Nazis on X. What I > care about is that, after 40 years of fighting for internet freedoms, the > Nazis are now freely flowing into the timelines of everyone you care about. > To continue to parrot this 20th century idea of free speech without > considering the infrastructure actor is to be in denial as this information > warfare submerges us. It is exactly the belief here, cloaking the corpo > platform in the dream of the democratic voice, that has kept us from the > nuance needed to navigate these pathetic implementations of mass media we are > still just beginning to grapple with. > > Thanks for reading. > > Cade > > ~ > > Founder, New Design Congress > https://newdesigncongress.org/en/join > >> On 11.10.24 18:55, Harv Stanic Staalman via nettime-l wrote: >> Oh, how democratic and advanced. Asking for a censorship in a 21st century, >> after 40 years of fighting for internet freedoms certainly brings memories >> of the >> //Reichsministerium//// für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda//. >> I wonder which EU funding scheme sponsors this? >> Geert should know better. > -- > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: https://www.nettime.org > # contact: [email protected] -- # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: https://www.nettime.org # contact: [email protected]
