But claims that right wing voices are being censored would come from... right wing sources, no? Are those valid but not the left wing sources? If so, why?
Claims that right wing voices are being censored are from my own observations. including the examples I cited in my comment. To be clear I do not think left voices should be censored, I am 100% opposed to all censorship, banning ect
In the 90's I was fighting conservatives that wanted to censor the much smaller and newer internet from things like violence (games) and porn.
Today it is the left that is attempting to censor the internet over much more nebulous and undefined terms like "misinformation" and "hate speech" all of which have very subjective definitions and seem to be a moving target.
What I'm hearing here is "my viewpoint is valid because I observed it, and the viewpoint that disagrees with me is biased". Your observations may happen to generalize and be correct, and the other viewpoint may be biased, but that doesn't mean the argument you made in the previous post was correctly reasoned.
If data or research can't support "right wing voices are being censored", while you're perfectly entitled to believe that based on seeing a couple specific voices get censored, it's a bit unreasonable to dismiss claims to the contrary as "left wing bias" when the data simply isn't there to support it.
I personally wouldn't be surprised if you end up with political bias in automated censorship and filtering algorithms, the training set is going to be full of bias and it will be hard to filter that out. But they also quite possibly managed to come up with something that isn't leaning in any particular direction.
Between the two possibilities "Twitter is suppressing <x> speech" and "Twitter is not suppressing <x> speech and a few people are crying censorship to try and get unbanned/get attention" I think occam's razor suggests the latter, personally, because we know it has been an effective tactic in the past and that sort of speculative claim gains traction regardless of whether you can prove it.
Lots of people claim to be shadowbanned when they're not, similarly.
>>If data or research can't support "right wing voices are being censored"
You seemed to have missed my primary assertion which has nothing to do with banning or shadowbanning or even the research into those topics
My primary assertion is the terms of service, the rules under which content moderation is governed is a left political bias in many area's include gender, what is considered "hate speech", what is "misinformation"
I do not need to point to any examples of banning to highlight this as it self evident for anyone that reads the terms of service.
I.e. Analyzing Twitter suspensions shows that users’ sharing of links to misinformation sites was as predictive of being suspended as was the users’ political orientation. "Conservative" accounts share more misinformation, and violate with greater frequency policy rules.
A study that although argues twitter has a bias, readily admits in it's data sampling that the banned/suspended accounts violate terms and conditions at a mich higher rate.
Reasons listed for banning these individuals in Hanania’s own data sheet include “violent threats,” “harassment,” “inciting violence,” “targeted abuse,” “doxxing,” “pro-Nazi tweets,” and “racist slurs.” Additionally, about a quarter of the accounts listed are still active and no longer suspended.
Kicking off a bunch of Nazis and trolls isn’t very compelling evidence that your average conservative is getting unfair treatment on Twitter. The majority of the “victims” here seem to have been engaged in abuse, and it’s reasonable for a private company like Twitter to kick off people who are undermining the quality of their platform by harassing or threatening other users.
" We then investigated potential political bias in suspension patterns and identified a set of 9,000 politically engaged Twitter users, half Democratic and half Republican, in October 2020, and followed them through the six months after the U.S. 2020 election. During that period, while only 7.7% of the Democratic users were suspended, 35.6% of the Republican users were suspended. The Republican users, however, shared substantially more news from misinformation sites – as judged by either fact-checkers or politically balanced crowds – than the Democratic users. Critically, we found that users’ misinformation sharing was as predictive of suspension as was their political orientation. Thus, the observation that Republicans were more likely to be suspended than Democrats provides no support for the claim that Twitter showed political bias in its suspension practices. Instead, the observed asymmetry could be explained entirely by the tendency of Republicans to share more misinformation."
“We were surprised,” says González-Bailón, an associate professor in Penn’s Annenberg School for Communication. “Previous work has documented that Twitter users tend to have a liberal bias. But we found that across the board, the news most often shared has a right-leaning bias. This increases the visibility of conservative voices, even in the context of protest mobilizations with liberal goals.”
>>. During that period, while only 7.7% of the Democratic users were suspended, 35.6% of the Republican users were suspended. The Republican users, however, shared substantially more news from misinformation sites –
The key flaw here was "misinformation" at that time included what is now considered "fact" about COVID Policies, and "science", including mask effectiveness, vaccine effectiveness, Lab leak theory, and a whole host of other things that were "misinformation" in 2020 but not in 2022. that is the entire problem with the "misinformation" narrative
Science after all is not "experts telling us what to think" but instead is in reality it the act of continual questioning of established narrative
Shutting down debate for "misinformation" is itself anti-science
Actually, you're wrong. Read the paper. And I quote:
"Reasons listed for banning these individuals in Hanania’s own data sheet include “violent threats,” “harassment,” “inciting violence,” “targeted abuse,” “doxxing,” “pro-Nazi tweets,” and “racist slurs.” Additionally, about a quarter of the accounts listed are still active and no longer suspended."
Twitters Covid misinformation policy didn't come into effect untill the end of Dec, 21. So 2020 is incorrect.
Why don't you read the actual policy instead of making stuff up?
