The recent purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk has fairly dramatically changed my Twitter feed as conservatives have both flocked to the site and apparently gotten some sort of boost in the algorithm. Seriously, some of the things I’m reading now are pretty inflammatory (Paul Pelosi was assaulted by his gay lover?) and also really really stupid (99% of the rest of the troll-baity commentary). It’s like they aren’t even trying to be clever or thoughtful. One idiot named “Nick something (Alpha Male)” literally posts multiple times a day that his goal in life is to teach young men to become “alpha males.” How is this guy showing up in my feed?
On the one hand, I really do firmly believe that we need to get back to a place where conservative ideas and progressive ideas are in dialogue again to find solutions that we can (mostly) all live with. I can also see that so far, this is not it.
The big change is of course because Musk believes that Twitter has been too quick to moderate “free speech,” specifically what he calls “conservatives” including humor sites like the Babylon Bee. Even when a user has incited violence, Musk feels that this should be allowed. Basically anything one is allowed to say on the street should be allowed. However, this stance has been softened slightly to appease advertisers who were starting to flee. Musk committed to them that he wouldn’t let the site become a “hellscape.” So far, it’s not quite that bad, although use of the “n” word has apparently gone through the roof as users test the boundaries of the lighter moderation.
Which brings us back to the bloggernacle, and our policies at Wheat & Tares. We have always been one of the lightest moderated sites among Mormon blogs. One reason we are lightly moderated is that we have the Like/Dislike buttons which allow users to censure the comments they dislike and take the pressure off the team to keep things cleaned up. We don’t endorse every comment (or even every post–we aren’t a monolith). We only censor when there are really bad personal attacks that aren’t corrected with a gentle reminder. We often invite our downvoted commenters to post if they have something to say that will broaden the discussion.
That’s not to say our approach is right or leads to the best outcomes. It’s always a work in progress.
Twitter has apparently been considering a dislike button. Musk likes to tinker, so we shall see what ultimately happens over there. The most important thing Twitter does is connect journalists.
Content moderation (and censoring of comments) is supposed to create a “safe space” for dialogue. Heavier moderation (like Twitter used to have) removes things like disinformation, hate speech, racist rants, doxxing, bots, porn, calls to violence, snuff videos, etc., to the extent it can. Musk is infamously on bad terms with his trans daughter and only started joking about buying Twitter when Babylon Bee (a conservative humor site) was barred after posting an anti-trans joke. So basically, this seems to be motivated by the newest conservative culture war that’s going gangbusters: the war on trans people.
What you lose by moderating too much is that those things still exist, but we aren’t seeing them and don’t realize they are prevalent. Also, it’s often unclear what is disinformation and what’s not, especially in our highly politicized country in which I recently saw a TV showing CNN and Fox News side-by-side, and you would not know that they were both contemporary news programs. There was no overlap in content or spin at all. Zero. These are two Americas.
What you lose by NOT moderating is the marginalized voices that get shouted down by the strident majority. Black Twitter was a huge thing until last week (still is, to be fair), but the rise in racist speech will change that. If you have a party and you invite black people and white supremacists, you’re probably going to have a party with just white supremacists attending.
- What do you think is the best way to moderate content? Heavier hand or lighter touch?
- Do you think the like/dislike buttons help or hinder a site’s vibe? Would they be a good change for Twitter?
- Which Mormon blog does content moderation the best in your experience? What do you like about it?
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
The whole Twitter episode is a little bizarre, that a mega-rich purchaser could alter the business model and operation of what is almost a public communications utility such that users will see significantly different content. Imagine if, fifty years ago, a super rich guy bought the phone company and started filtering which calls got through to you. Or started sending more advertising calls and abusive phone calls to your line. We wouldn’t put up with that.
As for Mormon blogs, I like the light hand that W&T is using. My motto has always been “protect the forum!” That is, when offbeat or combative comments become so obnoxious that they derail the discussion or offend other commenters to the point of leaving — you chuck out those pernicious comments and commenters when that starts happening. In the wake of Trumpified public discourse, there is the additional consideration that comments repeating malicious falsehoods should also get the hook without much concern. It’s just appalling how much damage Trump and his low information followers have done to public discourse.
Ditto to Dave B’s comment, except replace Trump with Biden/Obama.
I prefer light to no moderation. It’s taken some time and maturity for me to get to where I am now, and I’m still not perfect, but when I see a comment I don’t like from a person I’ve never met, I let them alone. The thing is, they aren’t going to listen to me anyway. Also, I sometimes feel/assume that they are only doing it to rile people up anyway because they are bored. If you don’t feed the bad comments, the commenter usually moves on. My position here isn’t 100% and I will step in to combat marginalization if necessary. For example, if I had been at the Utah Walmart on Halloween when a bunch of priviliged white kids wore blackface and prison costumes, I probably would have spoken up.
Sometimes as a coping mechanism I type out my response, zingers and all, but don’t hit post. That way I got to process my feelings without adding to the chaos.
I like the voting buttons as it helps gauge the viewership of the community. A few times I’ve been surprised by the votes (not often) and leaning into that has been educational for me.
I have never used Twitter and probably never will. I only use Insta and that’s mostly to share pictures of my kids and dog with my family, which don’t live nearby.
As for which Mormon blogs do this well, I don’t really know what to say. T&S in my opinion died about 7-8 years ago. BCC is still out there. Some bloggers are heavy handed on deleting inappropriate comments, but not deleting all comments that referenced the deleted comments, which creates some weird conversations. I choose not to see what the Milennial Star community is up to. What other blogs am I missing out on?
@Chadwick: “I choose not to see what the Milennial Star community is up to. ” Wise choice. I’ve checked a few times and immediately regretted it. Based on his comment, though, bwbarnett would be right at home over there in the “Geoff B’s solo blog” which is basically what it is. I like healthy discourse. Twitter isn’t the place to get it. Neither, apparently, is whatever bwbarnett is listening to/reading. Except here, of course,
YouTube removing dislikes was probably the most asinine decision that I’ve seen a company do. They really shot themselves in the foot by taking the one tool that could help users identify clickbait, fraud and downright terrible content. With the most disliked videos being made by corporations, politicians, and celebrities, it was clear that YouTube was protecting not its users, but people in power. Even one of the co-founders of YouTube pushed back against this decision:
“The process works, and there’s a name for it: the wisdom of the crowds. The process breaks when the platform interferes with it. Then, the platform invariably declines.” – Jawed Karim
I think this blog has the right approach. Showing likes and dislikes can help users understand how comments are contributing to the overall conversation.
This blog is great with moderation. I have always felt very free to express doubts about Mormonism. On BCC and Times and Seasons and other Mormon blogs, it seems very easy to upset the thin-skinned moderators, who mostly seem not willing to have a sincere discussion about Mormon truth claims. The upvote/downvote buttons help this blog tremendously. But at the end of the day, this blog has only a handful of readers. And the readers, while diverse in the world of Mormonism, mostly think rather similarly.
On moderation and Twitter. I liked what Twitter was, generally speaking. I fear what Twitter will be allowed to become under Elon Musk. I used to think conspiracy theories were a fringe belief system. People like Alex Jones were extremist liars that only mentally disturbed people with paranoid personality disorders would believe, and that the fact that he was a serial liar was immediately apparent to any rational-thinking sane person. Now Alex Jones has the acclaim of a good number of other popular right-wing commentators (such as Candace Owens) and even politicians (notably Trump). He is almost mainstream on the right. This is terrifying. What we need right now isn’t an expansion of freedom of speech granted by private platforms. There are an abundance of right-wing and conspiracist platforms where right-wing conspiratorial speech is already allowed (and reasonable speech that debunks the conspiracy-theories is of course banned). We need a more moderated media ecosphere that allows well-evidenced speech to flourish and lies to perish. How to accomplish that, I’m not sure. But I highly, highly doubt that Elon Musk is going to help is arrive there.
I think W&T and BCC have it about right. I used to comment on Times and Seasons but have been banned. Also banned from Millenial Star, and Meridian Magazine. The right used to claim to be the defenders of free speech? The right have moved so much further to the right with trump.
After BWBs inane comment, I looked up what Biden has done to upset MAGAS and read an article in the Atlantic that the maga republicans are trying to appease trump, who believes democrats focus is to humiliate him, and these people have plans if they control the house to stop all governance and tie up all senior democrats in impeachment proceedings.
By the way BTW there are consequences to behaviour. I withdraw offers of help. I would not want to be in your company.
Those of you who can vote against a maga republicans, please vote and encourage anyone else to too.
Those of us who live in countries allied with America as the free world; occasionally think we should have some say in american politics because it affects us. We just have to hope there are enough of you willing to vote sensibly/against maga republicans.
I am not sure there can be sensible dialogue with maga republicans. There are no agreed facts. They don’t do facts. They do revenge, and other childish trump stuff. Just have to keep voting them out. PLEASE!
Chadwick, “T&S in my opinion died about 7-8 years ago. BCC is still out there.”
Right you are. T&S used to actually be quite good. I remember Julie Smith’s post on the PoX “revelation” just excoriating how misguided it was. Truly one of the best posts I’ve ever read on the Mormon bloggernacle. Way, way better than anything I have ever heard or could even imagine hearing from an apologist. Great discussions back in the day. I miss the old T&S. I’ve stopped reading BCC. The permas there seem to have potential and sometimes write stuff that isn’t too bad. But I feel that they just don’t allow for fair discussions. Now you have to login with your an account to post. Forget that. Plus the permas seem to come off as questioners and doubters and people who want to have sincere discussion, but then make an about-face and try extra hard to appear as if they are really full believers and inopportune times.
“I choose not to see what the Milennial Star community is up to”
Haha, I had forgotten about Millennial Star. I just checked that blog and man, that place is looney tunes. I remember many, many years ago trying to post there. Wow, I had to walk on some serious eggshells to disagree with people. I rank it with DezNat. Not worth my time or even basic acknowledgement of its existence.
Wheat and Tares is the only Mormon blog I read now. You guys are truly the best. Keep doing what you’re doing. Don’t stop writing and creating discussion topics.
I prefer a lighter touch in moderating philosophically but i reality with all the hate speech, misinformation, outright lies, being put out, there needs to be some moderation. The like/dislike button is good and you can see its effects in the comments on this article but sometimes I think it would be just better to get rid of the hateful speech, etc to lower the blood pressure of those that want an open and honest discussion. Musk is not about free speech when he wants to charge money to get you blue verification check. When I see the amount of money that goes into the media just to set things up to communicate, it’s hard to believe there is really a way for true free speech flourish. You don’t spend 44 Billion Dollars and not exert control. The same can be said with Fox, CNN, or any of the networks. The Internet was the last frontier of open speech and you can see it’s the new battle ground both with access and content.
@John W: T&S was my first foray into the blogernaccle. My deceased MIL and Nate Oman’s father were first cousins and that’s how I got started there. My face truly would light up when Julie Smith wrote anything. I used Julie’s and Jim Faucloner’s material when I was gospel doctrine teacher and my class ate it up. This was about 10-15 years ago, the Church’s Camelot years (for me at least). Incidentally, it feel like it was the Nov 2015 policy change that led to the T&S crew retiring. Now that blog seems to have about two bloggers and five followers.
Agreed on your assessment of BCC. I read the posts by Michael Austin and Kevin Barney. I don’t really bother with the comments. They also have some good guest posts.
Alas, T&S and BCC are dead. Long live W&T!
“What do you think is the best way to moderate content?”
I don’t have a Twitter account and my views are influenced by a couple of articles I read that I can’t find to link to. Moderate the commercial content and throw out the algorithm. Twitter’s goal is to make money. Free accounts (until Musk starts charging) are only free to the users because the users ARE the product. Twitter sells their info to advertisers. People see more ads the longer they are on Twitter. The way to keep people on Twitter is to stir up emotions that mean they engage more with the content. Best emotion for that? Outrage. Also fear. Keep people angry and scared and they’ll stick around to talk about it. So the algorithm prioritizes posts that create outrage and fear in order to show you more ads. Also, the more the algorithm knows about you, the more it can target ads to you. The more you engage with content, the more the algorithm learns. What content are people most likely to engage with? The outrageous – either to promote it or debunk it. The extreme conversations that happen on social media are stoked by the algorithm in order to sell ads.
Imagine the opposite: a social media site actively shows you lots of cat videos and the algorithm promotes posts about our similarities, and random acts of kindness. Posts that demonstrate respect for our shared humanity get bumped to the top. You’re not angry, so you don’t engage as much, which means the algorithm doesn’t know you as well, so the ads aren’t quite as targeted and advertising revenue declines.
Twitter isn’t the free market of ideas. It’s an advertiser market. The commercial speech benefits by stirring up outrage and fear. Facebook and Twitter basically have a lock on social media, and they both prioritize the algorithm in order to sell ads. Get rid of the commercial speech (which won’t happen) and see what happens to social media when it’s really social instead of commercial. Remember when Facebook was about tending a little farm, playing candy crush and poking your friend? It wouldn’t be a fix – we still have the CNN vs. Fox thing going on, but I bet it would at least decrease some of the vitriol.
The Bloggernacle isn’t trying to profile readers and bloggers to sell ads. Yet it still split into liberal and conservative. We followed the general trend in society; we didn’t cause it. No commercial speech in the Bloggernacle means the stage is a lot smaller. There’s no algorithm; the only people who really engage enjoy thoughty stuff and you pick for yourself what you do and don’t read. Less people; less engagement; less influence; less outrage.
As far as W&T goes, I like the upvote/downvote too, for the reasons stated by other commenters.
I use the blog aggregator ldsblogs dot com to skim through the titles of posts on other blogs, but rarely read them. I like Ziff’s statistics and observations so I read everything on Zelophehad’s Daughters, but those aren’t frequent (which is fine). And occasionally I’ll click on a post from BCC. I used to lurk at T&S once in a while and I’ve quit doing that.
Edit: and I must confess that I no longer read every post at W&T, not since I got invited to be a permablogger. Writing posts takes a chunk of the time that I used to use to read and comment on everything. Don’t get me wrong – I was absolutely thrilled by the invitation (long live W&T!), but I have to admit that it’s meant I can’t read and comment as much as I used to.
I read a post on another blog earlier today and was disappointed that there wasn’t a like/dislike button. So I guess that tells you where I am on that question.
The problem is — who gets to decide if something is true or false? If something is offensive or harmless? If someone is being sincere or sarcastic?
Dave B says “It’s just appalling how much damage Trump and his low information followers have done to public discourse.”
I say “It’s just appalling how much damage Biden/Obama and their low information followers have done to public discourse.”
Who gets to decide if one statement is true and the other is false and should be censored? In this example, I would have to say BOTH are true. So to promote or allow one of those statements and exclude or censor the other is wrong. Pre-Musk Twitter would most likely censor my comment as “hate speech” and allow Dave B’s comment. Why? Because the people that get to decide have the same opinions as Dave B. A few commenters above mention the desire for diverse, open, civil discussions. You don’t get that when you cancel/censor people with opposing views.
And please don’t say that there is a ton of evidence for the Dave B version and literally none for the Bwbarnett version of that statement. There is PLENTY of evidence for both. I don’t have a problem admitting that there are lots of conservatives who have damaged public discourse and plenty of other things. What I do have a problem with is liberals who claim no responsibility for anything bad in the world. It seems like there is some of that here at W&T.
I’ve been very grateful for the lighter moderation here at W&T.
W&T is the only blog I read while in crocs & sweats. I think that says it all.
About the only Mormon blogs I check in on regularly are this one and Exponent ll. I’m not on Twitter but it doesn’t sound like it’s going to go well. Who has time for all the aggravation anyway?
I definitely feel a lighter hand is the best approach.
I’ve never been on Twitter, but I feel the Likes/Dislikes hinder a site’s vibe. I usually get a ton of dislikes on this blog, and it rarely, if ever, bothers me. But I have seen beautiful comments that I didn’t even agree with get a ton of down votes, while watching other comments that I felt were depraved get a ton of up votes. I’m convinced the vote function says far more about the people who frequent a blog (or perhaps a minority obsessed with the vote function) than it does about an actual comment or commenter. It’s almost a morality by majority vibe. My inability to fully figure out this mindset and how and whether it connects to the liberal Mormon and/or Mormon liberal mindset at large is one reason I continue to come here, in addition to ascertaining the view back at the conservative Mormon and Mormon conservative that someone like me tends to be (with a few exceptions).
I’ve also written out comments a number of times in which I never hit the Post button. If nothing else, it’s therapeutic.
I used to read every post here religiously, but I’ve regularly started skipping some, mainly out of a need to prioritize time and spend less time online, but also because I’ve found some of the posts a little depressing, though not always in the way the author intends.
I rarely go to BCC. I regularly check T&S and Millennial Star, but rarely comment. Every once in a while I’ll check Juvenile Instructor, mainly for the book reviews. I’ve never paid much attention to any of the moderating standards of these blogs.
Although a personal blog, I’ve always enjoyed Sixteensmallstones from J. Max Wilson. He is extremely articulate, and the discussion in the comments often rival the post itself. He hasn’t posted frequently the last three years due to writing a book, but I look forward to both his book and his return to blogging.
Kind of looking forward just a little bit to when civilization collapses and there won’t be an internet anymore. We can go back to communicating face to face like evolution meant us to. Telling tall tales around a fire, shit-posting in-situ.
Yes, flurp, but then no Wordle or refrigerators. Scratch that,
Yes, flurp, but then no Wordle or refrigerators. Scratch that,
@Eli – Thanks for the introduction to Sixteensmallstones from J. Max Wilson! I’ve begun reading a few of his old posts, and I like where it’s taking me 🙂
The only reason I have a Twitter account is because they make you have one to be able to look at stuff, so then I can look at things that people send. Almost entirely humorous (and there is a lot of great humor there). Janey hit it spot on that inasmuch as the platform is for advertising, it’s not really this utopia of free speech.
I think generally light moderation is the right approach … I guess I’d say things like organizing / facilitating criminal activity and violence, DOXing or otherwise truly harassing someone / posting private information, etc. is what should get delete. As for “false information”, I’m not really sure why BWBarnett things it’s not possible to figure out whether something is “true” or “false” (evidence is one place to start), but I agree it’s probably impossible to fully moderate or flag or delete “false” information. I don’t know the answer to that. At least don’t program algorithms to spread it, and we just need to educate people better so they can think critically.
I have liked the moderation on this blog both as a commenter and a blogger. Yes, our audience typically has a lot in common – you can’t be all things to all people, so I wouldn’t expect many conservative orthodox Mormons to spend a lot of time here (although I am always interested in hearing from those who do). I do think we’re generally a pleasant bunch and yes, being able to do downvotes I think can prevent people from feeling like they need to argue or call out or be mean to a comment they don’t like. They can see that it’s getting downvoted and move on.
Times & Seasons is so boring to me now (a lot of angels dancing on pins content). It’s less about the political / religious conservatism over there than just that I think the content is uninteresting. Agree there are some good posters on BCC but the heavy moderation (plus it seems a lot of comments get stuck in filters / moderation and they don’t do anything about it) is annoying. Here at W&T we try to keep up on comments that are getting stuck in moderation and let them through. It is frustrating to put thought into a comment and have it be stuck.
This is a broader topic than Twitter, but I think a lot about this idea that both sides need to be heard. Really? How far do we take that? Just because someone has a different idea doesn’t make it a good idea. In a marketplace of ideas, some ideas lose. A lot of conservative ideas are losing in academia, and a lot of conservatives bemoan that. I’m more of the mind that if your ideas are so good, they should be winning. If they aren’t, that doesn’t necessarily mean you’re being censored or canceled or discriminated against. It means your ideas aren’t winning. I know that’s overly simplistic and not always true but I do tire of people whining about not getting a platform.
The like/dislike button here at W&T is an enjoyable feature, although I’m genuinely curious at how almost every single comment has 1 or 2 dislikes. Who are these people that seem to rage-read every post? If you dislike the posts and comments that much, why are you here? It’s bemusing.
I miss the golden days of blogging, as well as LDS forums. I spent years over at the Nauvoo forum and credit commenters like The Monk, aka Ben Spackman, for the world’s gentlest, slowest, faith transition. No crisis for me, just a gradual move to a more nuanced place.
I miss what T&S used to be, it’s a shadow of its former self. And for me, there is a moment, IMO, when BCC started losing its former mojo. I watched January 6 unfold with absolute horror and craved a place to process with fellow Saints what that day meant. Two and a half years later, I’m still stunned at the silence after that day. What happened, BCC?
(Sidenote: You might think that because I’m a Canadian, “What do you care? It’s not your country.” My counterpoint is that the US is a behemoth in terms of cultural influence and we feel it as your northern neighbors. The last 7 years and the rise of Trump have emboldened some awful elements up here as well. It’s heartbreaking to read/hear how many members have embraced The Big Lie. I still truly struggle to understand it.)
Maybe it’s just the decline of blogging overall. But it feels like there are fewer places for nuanced members to have conversations. FMH is gone, BCC posts less and has lost some contributors, T&S posts are uninteresting or B&W, Words of Mormon over at Facebook is lovely but lower traffic, Reddit doesn’t seem to have a nuanced space, and Twitter is too short for real conversation. Podcasts are a great new option, but they don’t provide that same feeling of community for me.
I also read Jana Reiss’ Flunking Sainthood, The Exponent, and Zelophehad’s Daughters (I appreciate you keeping the lights on over there, Ziff!) but it’s W&T that helps me feel like I’m not alone at Church. Thanks, everyone.
ji & bwbarnett: I had all but forgotten about J Max Wilson. Years ago I read some of his stuff, and it was good, but he was a total blowhard and a real jerk in the comments. Trying to have any kind of reasonable discourse felt like being shouted down by a misogynist. So basically life was just too short for that.
Which brings me to something else someone mentioned upthread. They said they like W&T, but there aren’t that many “readers.” Actually, there are a lot more readers than commenters on all the blogs, and that distinction is sometimes related to the moderation and sometimes it’s intentional based on what the permas/authors want to create. Personally, I like posts that have good content, but even more than that I’d rather have good questions asked that the group can discuss. Even if our audience of commenters does seem to be fairly like-minded, people often make really good points or phrase things in a way that improves understanding. So to me, the comments and the discussion are at least as important as the post. The post should just tee up a good conversation.
But some posts are just designed to be stand alone essays that require no discussion (other than a slow clap?). Those are fine, too. I enjoy Jana Reiss’s writing, but she’s not running a conversation. Her posts stand alone. BCC has in the past done both, but they have a higher percentage of posts that don’t yield a discussion over there. That’s the author’s choice.
I appreciate you all here at W&T keeping such interesting discussions alive. Like many others have already mentioned, I’ve been sad to see less from BCC in recent years, although I realize that bloggers do need to have other things in their lives, and might need to move on from active participation. I appreciate Sam Brunson still blogging regularly, as he has good takes on so many relevant issues, especially since so many recent Church discussions relate to money, and that’s really his wheelhouse, as a tax lawyer.
Also, thanks for the shout-outs, Margot and Janey! Thanks for sticking with me (and Lynnette!) at ZD and putting up with our intermittent output. 🙂
Angela C, Pray tell, why did you address me in your last comment? I haven’t been part of this discussion.
Elisa: A lot of conservative ideas are losing in academia, and a lot of conservatives bemoan that. I’m more of the mind that if your ideas are so good, they should be winning. If they aren’t, that doesn’t necessarily mean you’re being censored
I love your posts, but I would push back a little bit on this statement. I spent 30+ years as a professor, including quite a bit of time at a state university. The enforced “orthodoxy” there is suffocating — much worse than at BYU. People do get turned down for tenure, or grants, or whatever because they are perceived as not being in sync with the dominant political and social views in academia. Of course no one will actually come out and say this was the reason for a decision, but it does happen. People who are not in the majority just learn to stay silent about their views, if they don’t want to be blackballed. So in that sense “soft censorship” at least does happen.
Anyway, I’ve been PIMO for the majority of my life, and I’m not young anymore. For the last 5-6 years (at least), Wheat and Tares has been a lifeline for me, even though I’m just a lurker 99.9% of the time. I can’t imagine how much time and effort it takes to create the quality posts here (and yours are at the very top, Elisa; my comment above notwithstanding). Thanks so much to all of you for making life in the church bearable for a PIMO like me.
Best way to mod content – imo – is a light touch policy with a heavy hand in reserve for someone who shows up daring the admins to use it, by repeatedly, covertly abusing the privilege of a light touch.
I think the up/down -votes have a positive impact here at W&T and are likely one of the big factors contributing to the relative healthy participation here, but I can only speculate why or how, worth about .02¢.
I’ve never joined Twitter, but I see an awful lot of tweets reposted, and I’m often tempted. Except now it’s morally impossible for me, thanks Elon. I’ll withhold speculation about the efficacy of a like button there.
Which Mormon blog is best at this? ??
My kids ask me questions like this and I hate it.
ji: My apologies! That should have been addressed to Eli, not you. I am just losing my mind, that’s all.
Bwb, I’m glad you’re enjoying some of Wilson’s stuff. “Apostasy as Conspiracy Theory” was borderline life-changing for me. I wasn’t in real danger of apostasy, but his post helped me see the limits of logic (or the lack thereof) as well as understand a little bit more our complex nature as human beings. I was bothered by apostate material for a long time but couldn’t entirely figure out why. I ruled out cognitive dissonance a while earlier. His post helped me realize that it was really more that I was bothered by the fact that I wasn’t bothered by it. I just couldn’t articulate why the way he did. That post also gave me greater empathy for those struggling with their faith, and even helped me pinpoint some of my own logic-based biases.
Angela C, I’m sorry you got that vibe from his blog, but I haven’t read every post. I did think he was a little rougher around the edges in responses. I’m a huge fan of tact, but from his post on his blogging and commenting philosophy, I think he sacrificed tact for conciseness and brevity (two things I could work on). I didn’t see the misogyny (not all that qualified to see it anyway), but from stuff I’ve seen outside his blog, I think he treats his wife better than 99% of LDS men do theirs.
Elisa, I totally agree that not all ideas are equal. If I don’t, however, entertain the idea that an idea I think is superior could be upended by another even more superior, even if I’ve looked at it a number of times, then I think I’ve limited my growth potential somewhat. Having said that, I realize life is short, and we can only allocate so much time to challenging what we think we know. Conceding that what I consider superior ideas may potentially have cracks, however, is actually another reason I come here.
@heterodoxl, that’s totally fair. I’m not in academia and I would be curious for other people’s experiences. Both universities I attended had pretty strong conservative contingencies but I know that’s not always the case. I noted my comment was overly simplistic and more intended it to be a conversation starter to hear other takes. Probably a better topic for an actual post where I spend more time presenting the other side that my own pet peeve hot take typed on an iPhone while filling my car with gas :-). I have some examples of this outside of academics so maybe I will address it in the future. Again would be curious for people’s experiences with the extent of someone’s duty to give airtime (or brain capacity) to “all sides” of an issue. A post for another day.
As a long-time fan of Southern-fried Rock-n-Roll, can’t neglect to mention the famed (and played to DEATH) Lynyrd Skynyrd tune of that name. (“And this bird you cannot change…”).
Of course, as Janey well pointed out how the need to retain advertisers by Twitter does and, after Musk’s purchase, already did result in SOME moderation, so as not to scare away sponsors. I would disagree that it’s not “free”, as in, sure, it’s not “olly-olly-oxen-free”, else the “hellscape” of the crazies and weirdos out there, but it’s still an arrangement one FREELY engages in. As long as moderation and/or content decisions aren’t driven by either government edict or overt threats of violence, it’s still very much “free”, at least in the context of the First Amendment.
However, freedom to get on ones soapbox to utter one’s views or post something online, or create one’s own web page, and so on, doesn’t impose a duty on others to be heard, or to even provide a forum (or soap box, or make way on the street corner). I’ll leave aside the discussion of social media in collusion with partisan politicians, that’s a huge thread on its own, as is the “Section 209” legal immunity currently enjoyed by social media content providers. Now that Twitter is owned by Mr. Musk, he can fairly much do with it what he wants, and if it bothers some account holders that some conservative viewpoints, especially those favorable to our 45th POTUS, Donald Trump, well, that’s a market decision of his as to whether said “offended” account holders bolt from Twitter or not. Just as, in the “aughts”, there was a self-styled “progressive” radio network titled Air America, with noted commentators such as Al Franken, Rachel Maddow, and Cenk Uygur, as a counter to conservative talk radio, especially the late Rush Limbaugh. To the dismay of its investors and what few followers it had, however, Air America was a ratings and financial failure, and it was off the air after a six-year run. We shall see how Twitter fares with Elon Musk at the helm, or in competition with other social media companies.