Since Meta announced they would stop moderating posts much of the mainstream discussion surrounding social media has been centered on whether a platform has a responsibility or not for the content being posted on their service. Which I think is a fair discussion though I favor the side of less moderation in almost every instance.
But as I think about it the problem is not moderation at all: we had very little moderation in the early days of the internet and social media and yet people didn’t believe the nonsense they saw online, unlike nowadays were even official news platforms have reported on outright bullshit being made up on social media. To me the problem is the godamn algorithm that pushes people into bubbles that reinforce their correct or incorrect views; and I think anyone with two brain cells and an iota of understanding of how engagement algorithms works can see this. So why is the discussion about moderation and not about banning algorithms?
Exactly. Even Meta and their thousands of lawyers would immediately say this. How does it harm people? Prove it does. Why are they singled out? They’re just showing content they think is relevant, and I’m guessing they honestly are. It’s that political groups take advantage of that, and make slop that enrages and inflames. But Meta would just say “you can’t punish us for trying to make our platform successful”. A mess all around