> Ofcourse Narendra Momeme and his fan club owe their rise to social medias algo amplification design, as much as anything else, so its going to be interesting to see where the story goes.
Narendra Modi was 3 times Chief Minister of Gujarat much before Social Media even existed. He was already popular and a seasoned politician. And Congress being the weakest helped him a lot as well.
You can probably attribute Social Media for Arvind Kejriwal's rise to power in Delhi as a more accurate representation of Social Media having direct impact on electoral politics. But to say Modi came to power only because of Social Media is the most ignorant take on Indian Politics.
> One of these pro-Government channels has claimed that Rihanna (the American singer) is a farmer leader and member of the Congress Party (because Rihanna tweeted in favour of the protesting farmers).
You do realize that this is sarcasm right? I can give you umpteen instances of sarcasm being used in Indian media as a way to ridicule celebrities who just support a cause without knowing anything about it. I still remember how Deepika Padukone was roped in for Anti-CAA protests by giving her a measly 5 crores to just show up at JNU and do her drama.
Are you telling us that Rihanna knows more about Farmer Protests and Farm Laws in India than Indians themselves? It is high time we call out the hypocrisy of the West. Biden Administration is literally moving 30 billion dollars COVID aid reserved for US farmers to fighting climate change[1]. If Rihanna cares so much about the plight of farmers she should focus inwards in her own country. What is even more laughable is that Rihanna supports those Farmers, most of whom come from stubble burning regions of Punjab and Haryana (the ones who directly contribute to massive air pollution in Delhi) [2].
I prefer going straight to Github issues if documentation fails me. But yes, the more familiar I get with the stack, the lesser I have come to rely on Stackoverflow.
> we are in no way in a “Censorship Era”, that’s utter hyperbole
The irony is that you are literally replying to my account that got banned for having a contrary opinion. It isn't hyperbole. It just so happens that you are living in your own bubble where you coincidentally are in agreement with powers that be. Or you aren't vocal about your opposition to things online. Both of which don't test the limits of free speech. People feel Censorship is real when they test the limits. And those are in plenty. Maybe when you test those limits you'll understand what Censorship is all about.
I was banned for "flamewar" comments that I have been indulging in "for months". Sure I was banned for the last comment that ticked the mod off (a comment against privacy violations of users who had their data stolen through theft) but the decision was
not based on that alone. It was based on comments leading up to it: Most of which concern Big Tech Censorship. You can check my comments section if you are sceptical. It's publicly accessible anyways.
I got banned here for saying this but I'll continue to say it nevertheless. We are already in the Censorship Era. This is an Orwellian Nightmare. The quicker this is brought under control the better. The last thing we need is Corporate Overlords controlling what we say or do online. This includes Hacker News as well.
> where numerous --highly downvoted-- comments quite correctly predicted what was coming.
I got banned for "flamewar" when I literally was opposing this form of censorship in those articles. Then everyone were quite happy with Trump/far-right groups being banned and did not care about the big picture. Censorship is real. It is here. Big Tech has tasted power it will never want to let go of. The quicker we realize this the better!
> but they also didn't tell you that the SpaceX flight
We know it is a SpaceX flight. I have never seen any news story call it an "American flight". Have always seen news stories attribute to the organization: NASA/SpaceX/Virgin Galactic etc. I would have ignored the slight had the story at least mentioned ISRO. And this is a report by the "Science Correspondent". This would be a bare minimum expectation.
> I vouched you comment back up because I think it's worth linking, but no need to ascribe some sort of malicious motive to the BBC here.
Thanks for vouching. Well BBC has held an anti-India stance for quite a long time[1]. Even positive stories are spun around to paint India in a negative light. And it is not just the BBC. A huge section of the Western media indulges in this behavior. So felt like calling them out. Even if I am the lone voice here.
So because you were not compensated properly you decided to screw the users of your company who had nothing to do with you being compensated less. You act like you are some kind of martyr but you are the sole person responsible for the human rights violations of thousands and potentially millions of unsuspecting users who used that service. I hope you can sleep well tonight knowing how you deliberately violated privacy and rights of people unconnected with your compensation issue. If you were treated unfairly you should have resigned. Not fuck the company over.
> Perhaps in these specific cases, they are justified
Not justified at all. Nothing can justify censoring a sitting President and destroying a small competitor. America is on the wrong path. This I say as a observer of American politics. Big Tech has too much power in its hands now.
> I'm the child of indian immigrants. My parents adored trump in 2016, I was meh because all my friends told me he was a white supremacist. I thought my parents had gone mad. But then I saw that nothing my friends claimed actually came true and in fact trump governed like any other republican but way better because he didn't exclude people due to culture war issues and he didn't warmonger and brought peace.
Exactly right. Thanks for keeping an open mind and not getting caught up in this frenzy of opposing Trump just for the heck of it. I can understand how hard it is to be in America right now and be a Trump supporter.
> But what really redpilled me was the impeachment farce where he literally was impeached for investigating his predecessor for crimes we now know occurred. That sends a very chilling message.
> exercises restraint on its immense natural power
I would have agreed with you provided it was the Government that had to do the banning first and took it's time and exercised restraint.
This is different. Big Tech cut off US Government communication lines from the rest of the World. Now we will never know what Trump is thinking except if he does a press conference. We will never know what the White House is doing. This causes major network effects across the World as people across the World want to know what is going on in the White House and what is on Trump's mind. Before internet and social media all communications were between the World leaders/bureaucrats and the rest of the World was pretty much oblivious to what was happening unless it became breaking news. Everything was opaque. That is not what I want to go back to. Trust me you don't want to wake up one day to learn your country is at War with another nation because everything was kept under wraps till the last minute. If you had known earlier you would have rallied the masses and built public pressure.
It is a public expectation to know what their leaders are upto. I want our leaders to be in the spotlight at all times. Trump is not just the President of USA, he is also a representative of USA to the rest of the World. Cutting off Trump's direct lines of communication cuts off feeds to the rest of the World about what is going on in his mind and the White House. This does not bode well for America as a responsible Democratic power. You do not cut off the lines to the Head of the Country with the World. No matter how much you disagree with him. This is irresponsible with Big Tech allowing it and US Congress keeping mum about it.
Exactly. Thanks for getting my point. Let us assume that the entire US Capitol plot was hatched in Parler. Even then that is just 1 transgression. Compare it to the history of social media enabling violence and that list runs into hundreds if not thousands (if you factor in the entire World). I haven't even covered threats of school shootings and other stuff that often gets overlooked.
When regime change happens in Middle Eastern countries Twitter was lauded for being a platform for voice of the oppressed. As long as it doesn't happen in America we should rejoice social media playing a pivotal role. The moment the same "Arab Spring" like situation strikes home all hell breaks loose.
WhatsApp won't be able to do anything about it. Even with publishing full page ads. It is just a big waste of money. I have had so many of my relatives and friends move to Signal already. Big Tech companies haven't yet understood Indian psyche. If we make a move it will be en masse. So never antagonise Indians. Just see what happened to Tik Tok. The next big movement would be from Twitter if Twitter doesn't fix its ridiculous ideological censorship policies.
I don't care about American Free Speech. I'm not an American. I'm an Indian.
Yes it is worse for America's image that a competitor censors another competitor. It puts a bad light on the US Government itself that it cannot regulate private companies and are at the mercy of private companies that even Government communications can be censored. This is far beyond what free speech is all about.
And don't tell me US Government hasn't banned private companies. Huawei ban immediately comes to mind. So many companies have been banned for nefarious activities including but not limited to fraud and scams. It is 100 percent in the purview of US Congress to ban for any violations of law. Free speech has nothing to do with powers the US Government enjoys vis-a-vis legal entities like a company or trust. A company is not an individual. A company is not a Citizen of the United States. A company doesn't enjoy free speech rights. It is a legal entity that was allowed to function because of the US Government. Not because Apple, Facebook, Twitter or Google decided to. Only the US Government can cancel trade licenses, company registration and debar individuals from ever holding directorship. That power is not vested in the hands of few silicon valley companies.
I'm not an American. So what sedition are you talking about? I won't comment on the rest of your stupid statement as you haven't even understood what I was saying. Maybe learn to read the entire comment before you give your 2 cents.
---
Editing because rate limited
> Not being an American perhaps you should be even more concerned about what you say. This just doesn't change the US Governments view what what you've been up to, your government also will be taking a very dim view.
Are you for real? I don't give a fuck as to what US Government thinks of me. I don't give a fuck to what my Government thinks of me. I have a clear view of what has transpired and I know the repercussions this will have on internet and our freedoms. No one can take that right of opinion away from me. Not you, not the American Government, not my Government. Neither have I been involved in any seditious activities nor will I ever be. It just goes to show how anti-free speech America has become these days. It shows in your replies to me that you can't even tolerate an opposing viewpoint without insinuations and veiled threats.
It's not just as simple as you make it sound. What this Censorship has done is conveyed to the World that American Government cannot be trusted. That America has 2 power centers not 1. The two power centers being American Government and Big Tech.
Any ban or removal should come from the elected Government. In this case it is the US Congress. This is what the World expects as this is how all Democratically elected Governments all over the World function. It is the Government which has a final say.
Now when Big Tech unilaterally decides to censor a sitting US President and bans a rival competitor this will cause every World leader and Government to sit up and take note. Everyone will ask themselves: are we now supposed to trust US Government for its word? What if tomorrow a private company decides to censor the US Government? If they can ban the US President's account they wield more power than even elected representatives. Why then should we liaison with US Government and why not directly talk to Big Tech as they seem to hold the power over even the US President.
Then it goes further than that: how do we trust that the incoming President won't be censored? Since all communications happen through a digital forum where one of the Big Tech companies is an intermediary in relaying such communications what is the guarantee that the communication is not tampered with? When Big Tech enjoys so much power in US, that it can censor the Government itself, then why can't this also be possible? If Big Tech can attach disclaimers to a sitting US President's content then why can't they tamper with the messaging too?
This sort of confusion existed for countries like Pakistan which has dual power centers: the elected Government and the military. You won't know whom to talk to as one can override the other. Which is why you have so many successful coups in Pakistan. What Big Tech has done is set a very dangerous precedent. Now no World leader will trust the word of the American Government at face value and will double/triple check every communication.
Narendra Modi was 3 times Chief Minister of Gujarat much before Social Media even existed. He was already popular and a seasoned politician. And Congress being the weakest helped him a lot as well.
You can probably attribute Social Media for Arvind Kejriwal's rise to power in Delhi as a more accurate representation of Social Media having direct impact on electoral politics. But to say Modi came to power only because of Social Media is the most ignorant take on Indian Politics.