By "social media" we mean any large computer network that allows people to interact in shared communities. The big ones of course are Facebook, Twitter (X), and Instagram, but we can't forget newer platforms like Discord and Slack.
Dedicated video sites are off-topic here and YouTube has its own separate thread
.
What we should discuss in this OTC topic are news items, business operations, and activities by the networks themselves, not specific things posted by users. Those should go into threads appropriate to the subjects of those posts. For example, if an actor tweets about a film, we'd discuss that in the Media forum topic for the film, not here. If Facebook changes its policies, that could be discussed here.
The politics, motives, competency and wider business activities of the owners and leaders of social media companies (e.g. Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg) are also off-topic — except in situations where they are directly making specific policy for the platform.
Talking about a particular Instagram policy change (or a high-profile ban on a specific user) directly announced by Mark Zuckerberg would be acceptable in this thread, speculating about Zuckerberg's wider motivations wouldn't be.
The thread's also not about "dumb thing [public figure] said on [social media platform]". If there isn't a specific thread related to the subject of the statement (e.g. US Politics), then it's probably gossip and not worth talking about.
created back in 2020 that we never opened. Unfortunately, it's a little stale, so bumping it isn't going to work very well, but I would like to restart it. The reason I'm doing so is that the Computer Thread seems to have become the de facto place for this sort of talk, and it's a big tonal clash with talking about computer tech.
The hot topic of the day is Elon Musk's bid to acquire Twitter. We first discussed it in the Computer Thread, starting roughly here, and I am not going to rehash the entire discussion. Instead, I am going to resume from the last post:
CNBC: Twitter is reportedly taking another look at Musk takeover bid
Twitter's board is reportedly meeting with Elon Musk and may seek to negotiate on his buyout offer. Musk claims to have secured $46 billion in funding to buy the company at a valuation of $43 billion and is preparing to make a tender offer to its shareholders.
While the board has passed a poison pill, it could be facing resistance to that from groups of shareholders and will want to talk things out rather than face a hostile takeover. It's also possible that Twitter's stock could crash if the offer fails to go through.
Another possible topic was originally posted here.
Ars Technica: EU to unveil landmark law to force Big Tech to police illegal content
Following on from the recently passed Digital Markets Act, which requires large tech companies to unbundle first-party software from hardware platforms, the proposed Digital Services Act will require medium and large social media platforms and search engines to police hate speech and disinformation while adding additional protections for children against targeted marketing.
It also bans "dark patterns", which manipulate or trick people into clicking on ads or other content. The article doesn't explicitly say what that means, but I assume it includes things like disguising ads to look like parts of a site's user interface, hiding "close" buttons, and such.
For large companies, the requirements would go into effect immediately. For medium companies, they would have a grace period to implement the changes.
Thierry Breton, the EU’s internal market commissioner, has warned that Big Tech has become “too big to care.”
This phrase, "too big to care", intrigues me. It's an indictment of the idea that these companies have decided that growth and engagement metrics overwhelm any sense of social responsibility.
In my opinion, a law like this would be impossible in the United States, since it would be challenged (likely successfully) on First Amendment grounds.
Edited by Mrph1 on Dec 12th 2023 at 11:24:56 AM
Reminder that Twitter owes the Australian government over $700K AU because they wouldn't comply with requests to tell the e-safety commission what they were doing to stop exploitation of children, and if they refuse to pay it then can be liable for daily fines of up to $600K backdated to last Feb. Given that Musk's attitude has been to ignore fines and fees and hope they go away, I'm guessing this is going to come to a head to see if the Australian government is going to take him to court. And a reminder that they can take him to court in America.
I can vaguely see X' point in saying "we'll hide the footage from Australians but you have no fucking right to tell us what to do outside of Australia."
Of course, Australia's reply is "if you want to operate in Australia at all, you obey Australia's rules worldwide."
I despise hypocrisy, unless of course it is my own.
Oh, bother.
And it's not like Twitter X hasn't done just that for far worse governments than Australia's.
Disgusted, but not surprised
Yep, Musk even justified complying with certain countries far reaching demands as "well they'll ban us in this country otherwise so if course I'll just comply with them." He can't pull the "this violates the sites principles of free speech" since he made it clear he'd compromise them to appease other nations.
Surrounded by weirdoes
So, odds of Twitter getting banned in Australia?
Wake me up at your own risk.
"I just did." XD
More seriously, calling him a hypocrite would be a valid attack on him, but it doesn't invalidate the argument itself.
Edited by Ramidel on Apr 23rd 2024 at 8:33:25 AM
I despise hypocrisy, unless of course it is my own.
Oh, bother.
It does in court. Trying to use the defense that it is against policy to appease government requests rings hollow if the other side can point to you doing just that in the past.
Disgusted, but not surprised
Owl House / Infinity Train / Inside Job Fan
So TikTok is expected to be banned today once President Biden signs that foreign aid bill.
The Owl House and Coyote Vs Acme are my Roman Empire.
Lost in Space
Incorrect. ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, has nine months to divest the service in a way that satisfies the law. Should it fail to do so, stores would be required to remove the app. This assumes that the law will survive the inevitable judicial review.
Edited by Fighteer on Apr 24th 2024 at 12:05:50 PM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Owl House / Infinity Train / Inside Job Fan
Ah. Okay. I’m sorry. I’m generalizing. My bad.
But yeah, it’s getting signed today if it hasn’t already.
Edited by BigBadShadow25 on Apr 24th 2024 at 12:31:53 PM
The Owl House and Coyote Vs Acme are my Roman Empire.
Face me now, Bitch!
Not sure where this goes, but Net Neutrality is officially back as of today.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
We have a Net Neutrality thread. Further discussions about that should go there.
Face me now, Bitch!
Literally hasn't been updated in 3 years, but thanks, will repost there.
Watch Symphogear
I don't have a personal stake in Tik-Tok since I don't use it, and like anything involving Congress and the internet I assume it was based on ignorance and paranoia and smugness, but it's weird seeing people defend Tik-Tok like it's a poor victim and not a product of a corporate entity that could be easily replicated by another corporate entity, maybe even one that's not under control of the CCP.
Never trust anyone who uses "degenerate" as an insult.
Surrounded by weirdoes
So, odds that Tik-Tok gets sold before the ban?
Wake me up at your own risk.
Lost in Space
My bet is on the law being struck down on First Amendment grounds. But if it withstands that, I expect someone with enough money will pick it up.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Calendar enthusiast
Low. Selling would mean ByteDance would also have to sell their algorithms, and they'd rather shut down TikTok than do that.
A procrastination in of itself
Can a foreign company have first amendment rights? Besides it’s not like censorship of geopolitical enemies hasn’t been done during the Cold War.
Not just a foreign country, one of the few countries on the US's list of hostile relations, which strips away even more protections they have.
Edited by Imca on Apr 25th 2024 at 7:30:45 PM
Yeah, I've been seeing some people predict that ByteDance just wouldn't sell, and would rather lose American users than doing so.
Given they would have to hand over there algorithm if they sold, and that doing so would prove them guilty of exactly what they are accused of (its been partly reverse engineered and it does apply some pretty heavy political influence, just not to topics amercements generally care about, being designed to fuck over Hong Kong, Taiwan, India, and there politicians instead)
I can see why they would rather take the hit then the loss of face.
Edited by Imca on Apr 25th 2024 at 7:51:14 PM
Like reflections in the glass!
It does have me questioning the impact on the businesses using it thought.
Like I'm of the opinion that if Chinese spyware is necessary for people to achieve the American Dream, then it only proves the Dream is dead. But I have to ask what exactly is stopping these small business owners from suing other platforms for promotion. Like X is still a thing despite it all, Youtube has its own short-form video division and even Facebook hadn't gotten myspace'd yet.
Face me now, Bitch!
Like reflections in the glass!
with X's current management, it'll be a surprise if Vine actually does pull a rebound.
More like trying to act like a stereotypical cyberpunk megacorporation that's functionally above mere national laws.