It’s a significant data point on the potential limits of Section 230.

  • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s all algorithms.

    I think the communication matters, though. A general home page doesn’t imply curation or endorsement. “For you” implies both.

    • BrikoXOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      That depends on what the general page is. If they are general trends that are shown to everyone then sure, but if it’s personalized, then it’s curation. Look at Lemmy. It has sorting and trending algorithms, but the personalization aspect is left to you as a user to decide by subscribing.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Actual curation is human. It’s not actually curated.

        It’s the implication that it’s curated that makes it “their speech” and not “user generated content”. They’re endorsing it with the way they present it, and that implied endorsement of dangerous behavior meaningfully increases the likelihood people do it, above and beyond the natural viral nature of ideas spreading.