Thread by @shengokai

With the same epistemic authority I mustered to say “fuck you” to your colleague, I say to you: fuck off. (1/n)

What this grifter is asking is the elimination of the elements of terms of service that allow for these companies to exercise what limited control they have over the content hosted on that platform. Tech companies had this authority for a while: they failed to use it. (2/n)

Putting that aside, the concept of social media the marketplace of ideas is utterly reprehensible given the treatment of LGBTQ folks and women. Numerous studies have indicated the disparities in treatment of these groups. I need not belabor over two decades of work. (3/n)

Assuming that social media as the marketplace of ideas is good says a lot about this grifter’s position on which ideas are valuable and from who these ideas should emerge. That is, she is supporting the organization of social media around existing structures of oppression. (4/n)

Moreover, it speaks to who this grifter believes should dominate the marketplace of ideas. Put simply, this grifter’s outrage at censorship is perfectly in keeping with the lack of research that characterizes her other work. (5/n)

If she had bothered to look at any of the harassment statistics gathered over the past decade, she might (or might not, given her politics) reconsider her understanding of social media as the marketplace of ideas. Then again, the grifters aren’t concerned with equity. (6/n)

Much less equity in knowledge production and circulation.

Unfortunately, much of the tech industry take her perspective as valid. Well, fuck them and fuck her. (Fin)