no*
R51
joined 1 year ago
I sort.. of see your point, but I can also say if you put me in a room of pedophiles, no amount of time spent in that room will turn me into a pedophile. I think the idea some people here are trying to express is that (and I'm going to change the analogy from pedo to antihomo) if you're in a room of people who are against homosexuality, at the very least the ones who are such for superficial reasons outside of their own resolve can be snapped out of it. The ones who truly believe that their reasoning is sound will continue to be alone in that thought.
The very notion of having a popular platform be censored from bigotry is laughable. It will become corrupted, always. Maintaining free speech with productive conversation is no easy task, it actually requires a lot of hard work and a lot of maturity within the userbase, and because it's so difficult to have some of these conversations, people want to completely chop it off. It's understandable, but I just don't like seeing people pretending to take the high ground here. Also, the fact that we cannot leave it to users to self-defederate is concerning and disrespectful to the userbase. Where does a community get the idea that it should choose what to redact from individual users, as though the users are too stupid to make that choice for themselves?
Yeah news is biased as it is because there are more events to report than there is time to report them. So a choice must be made on what to report. However, that choice is where the bias could end. The choice of what to report doesn't have include political bias in its conditions.