The Electronic Frontier Foundation recently made a post about how they are leaving X/Twitter in favor of other platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Bluesky, Mastodon and TikTok.
They made a long post about their reasoning for it, and it just doesn't make any sense. They talk about how small businesses might use Instagram or someone's "abortion fund" might use TikTok to spread information, or how "you're isolated and rely on online spaces to connect with your community" and a bunch of other weird justifications.
None of that makes any sense because they are writing as if using Twitter was somehow mutually exclusive with using all those other platforms. As if, unless they leave Twitter, they can't use those other platforms to communicate with people. Which, of course, is completely asinine. There's absolutely no reason why they can't duplicate their posts an all social media platforms, including Twitter. Posting on Twitter does not somehow exclude those other platforms.
Given that the EFF has notoriously become a far-leftist activist organization (it was supposed to originally be about educating and lobbying the government to protect people's computer and online rights, but has devolved into yet another far-leftist activist organization that has almost completely abandoned its original mission for their new religion), everybody knows exactly why they are leaving Twitter, and it's very strange why they seem to feel the need to lie about it, and make this very strange pretense like Twitter is somehow mutually exclusive with the others.
And the real reason is, of course, that those other platforms, especially Bluesky and Mastodon, are extremely heavily censored with an extremely strong far-leftist bias. Those are sites where you can post the most heinous, vile, horrendous, toxic rhetoric, directly calling for the massacre and torture of millions of people, extremely and blatantly racist stuff, extremely vile attacks and calls for violence, even lethal violence, directed at particular named people... as long as it's far-leftist rhetoric. If, however, you are a moderate centrist who posts anything even slightly critical of the far-left, you get immediately and permanently banned.
X/Twitter, in contrast, has extremely little censorship and moderation. The most violent illegal rhetoric may be removed and sanctioned, regardless of who posts it, but otherwise people are free to express whatever opinions they want, and to criticize whoever they want, regardless of their placement in the political compass. Moreover, people are allowed to post criticism and community notes to other people's posts, regardless of which political side they represent.
And that's precisely the problem that far-leftist activist organizations like the EFF have.
What baffles me is why the EFF feels the need to hide this, and to lie about the real reason whey they are leaving. Everybody knows this is the exact reason why they are doing so, and their own side would absolutely not criticize them for telling the truth. So why? It baffles the mind.
And do you know what's the most ironic thing about the entire thing?
The fact that the EFF has the most outreach precisely at X/Twitter, and by quite a large margin. Indeed, their posts there get more views than their posts in all other platforms combined. Usually several times the views than the combined views of all other platforms.
Indeed, their outreach in other platforms is absolutely abysmal. For example, their YouTube channel gets on average about 100 views per video, with some videos getting less than 10 views. Their posts on those far-leftist social media sites, and the other sites like Facebook, Instagram and TikTok get likewise some hundreds of views, perhaps a few thousands at most.
On X/Twitter, however, their posts regularly get tens of thousands of views. It's the platform where they have the most outreach, by quite a large margin.
And it's precisely the platform they are leaving.
The huge irony is, of course, that the EFF has traditionally opposed censorship. Every time that the US government (or any other government for that matter) has proposed a law that limits people's free speech online, the EFF has been on the frontline vocally opposing it.
But, as it always happens, these organizations get invaded by far-leftist activists, and suddenly they are all for censorship of their opposition. Suddenly they don't like it when there's an online platform that does not heavily censor opinions they don't like.
What an absolute joke.
Comments
Post a Comment