top of page

Women's Support Group

Public·10 members
Miles Kelly
Miles Kelly

So Why Do People Post Hateful Political Things On Social Media ; 18 Epic Ways Women React To Unsolic



Moreover, there is little awareness of the scope of the problem among relevant actors in the justice system as well as other professional groups such as medical professions and teachers, who lack sufficient training. In addition, specialist expertise and technology tools to ensure the collection of evidence are not always available to law enforcement officials. In many instances, law enforcement authorities tend to minimise the risk of online threats and sometimes refuse to investigate them. Social media platforms as well as other websites do not always act effectively to remove hateful content. These platforms should not be places where online abuse proliferates without consequence. Private companies must also do more to combat these attempts to silence women online. Fighting the digital dimension of violence against women and girls requires systematic and comprehensive responses from all actors involved.




So Why Do People Post Hateful Political Things On Social Media ; 18 Epic Ways Women React To Unsolic



Facebook has been criticized for making people envious and unhappy due to the constant exposure to positive yet unrepresentative highlights of their peers. Such highlights include, but are not limited to, journal posts, videos, and photos that depict or reference such positive or otherwise outstanding activities, experiences, and facts. This effect is caused mainly by the fact that most users of Facebook usually only display the positive aspects of their lives while excluding the negative, though it is also strongly connected to inequality and the disparities between social groups as Facebook is open to users from all classes of society. Sites such as AddictionInfo.org[84] state that this kind of envy has profound effects on other aspects of life and can lead to severe depression, self-loathing, rage and hatred, resentment, feelings of inferiority and insecurity, pessimism, suicidal tendencies and desires, social isolation, and other issues that can prove very serious. This condition has often been called "Facebook Envy" or "Facebook Depression" by the media.[85][86][87][88][89][90]


Facebook has had a number of outages and downtime large enough to draw some media attention. A 2007 outage resulted in a security hole that enabled some users to read other users' personal mail.[209] In 2008, the site was inaccessible for about a day, from many locations in many countries.[210] In spite of these occurrences, a report issued by Pingdom found that Facebook had less downtime in 2008 than most social-networking websites.[211] On September 16, 2009, Facebook started having major problems loading as people signed in. This was due to a group of hackers deliberately trying to drown out a political speaker who had social networking problems from continuously speaking against the Iranian election results. Just two days later, on September 18, Facebook went down again.[212]


The recent changes of the News Feed algorithm[357] (see content : News Feed#History) are expected to improve "the amount of meaningful content viewed".[358] To this end, the new algorithm is supposed to determine the publications around which a user is most likely to interact with his friends, and make them appear higher in the News Feed instead of items for example from media companies or brands. These are posts "that inspire back-and-forth discussion in the comments and posts that you might want to share and react to".[359] But, as even Mark Zuckerberg admitted,[357] he "expect the time people spend on Facebook and some measures of engagement will go down. But I also expect the time you do spend on Facebook will be more valuable". The less public content a Facebook user sees on their News Feed, the less brands are able to reach consumers. That's unarguably a major lose for advertisers[360] and publishers.


The company's way of handling scandals and criticism over fake news by diminishing its media company image is even defined as "potentially deadly"[361] regarding the poor and fraught political environments like Myanmar or South Sudan appealed by the "free basics" programme of the social network.Serbian journalist Stevan Dojcinovic goes further by describing Facebook as a "monster" and accuses the company of "showing a cynical lack of concern for how its decisions affect the most vulnerable".[362]Indeed, Facebook had experimented with withdrawing media companies' news on user's newsfeed in few countries such as Serbia. Stevan Docjcinovic then wrote an article explaining how Facebook helped them "to bypass mainstream channels and bring [their] stories to hundreds of thousands of readers".[362] The rule about publishers is not being applied to paid posts raising the journalist's fears about the social network "becoming just another playground for the powerful"[362] by letting them for example buy Facebook ads.Critics are also visible in other media companies depicting the private company as the "destroyer of worlds". LittleThings CEO, Joe Speiser states that the algorithm shift "took out roughly 75% of LittleThings" organic traffic while hammering its profit margins"[363] compelling them to close their doors because they were relying on Facebook to share content.


Making the Internet more social enabled people to share their real name, likeness, voice, and the things that they are connected to. Now we always have an understanding of who is talking, who and what they are connected to, what they are saying, and to whom; through understanding identity and social context we have achieved greater openness as a society.


I, personally, find that this trend makes me a fanatic anti-extremist. I am boiling mad whenever I see or read such telegraphic (to use an ancient terminology) elaborations of ideas and facts, knowing that they are so wrong and misleading, and, at the same time, they find their ways into so many hearts and minds. Even worse, people who are still interested in a deeper analysis and a balanced view of topics, whether scientific, social, political or other, are considered leftovers from an earlier generation, and are labeled as extremists of the opposite color, by the fanatics of one corner or another.


Several years ago, I had a chance conversation with Jonathan Fanton, then President of the MacArthur Foundation. He mentioned that the Foundation was sponsoring a major study, to the tune of 50 million dollars, of how young people are being changed by the new digital media, such as the Internet. At the time, as part of our GoodWork research Project, I was involved in studies of ethics and focusing particularly on the ethical orientation of young people. And so I asked Pres. Fanton "Are you looking at the ways in which the ethics of youth may be affected?" He told me that the Foundation had not thought about this issue. After several conversations and a grant application, our GoodPlay project, a social science study of ethics in the digital media, was launched.


About

Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...

Members

bottom of page