Summary
Meta’s recent shift to right-leaning policies, including ending fact-checking in the U.S., scaling back content moderation, and allowing anti-LGBTQ rhetoric, has sparked boycotts and a user exodus.
The company also disbanded its diversity, equity, and inclusion team, drawing criticism.
Prominent users like director Cord Jefferson and nonprofits like Equal Access Public Media have left or reduced activity on Meta platforms.
Many are migrating to alternatives such as Bluesky, Amigahood, and Tumblr, while some remain trapped due to Meta’s dominance in communication and business.
I’d be lying if I said I didn’t enjoy the moral panic caused by this, at least a little. It shows that the pendulum is indeed swinging back from the woke left toward a more reasonable, rational center.
Disagreeing with things like DEI programs doesn’t make someone far-right - it just means they’re not far-left. You might not like it, but the reality is that the vast majority of people don’t agree with many of the views that are overrepresented on left-wing social media platforms like Lemmy. Doubling down on it just means losing more elections.
Glad i didn’t pay for this opinion, lol 🙃
I can see why you don’t charge for your opinions.
Tough talk from a UK instance chud named “free opinions” who hides behind phrases like “rational argument” and “unpopular opinions” to say heinous shit.
Is this true? Or is this just “people you know” and what the media you consume tells you?
If it is true then adding in the sources of where you got this information would really help your argument. Hell you may actually get more people to agree with you if you have solid evidence of what you said.
If this is just what “feels” right to you or if this is just something that other people told you is right then maybe look into that and see if reality lines up with what you are feeling and hearing.
Well they must know it is true, because this is their bio:
So I look forward to seeing their sources.
Like 95% of social media users, regardless of the platform, are mostly lurkers. A tiny fraction of the total user base creates the majority of the content. This is a self-selecting group of people who, by definition, don’t represent the average person - the average person doesn’t comment on message boards.
Reading discussions on Lemmy, for example, can create a skewed perspective of reality. Views like being okay with murdering CEOs are fairly popular here, yet I’ve never met anyone in real life who thinks this way. My work involves going into people’s homes to fix things, and we frequently chat about current events. I find that my average customer is far more reasonable in their views compared to the extreme opinions that often get highly upvoted here.
There’s also the broader observation that the left seems to struggle to win elections globally. We hear a lot about people moving toward the right, but rarely about anyone moving the other way. I’m not claiming this as absolute truth - it’s simply how I see things. Of course, there’s always a chance I could be wrong.
Is your idea of the “rational” center removing fact checking, reducing content moderation on political topics (which if history is of any indication means letting far right content to spread) and allowing the use of hateful speech against people you don’t like? I guess the fact that you think DEI is a far-left idea does indicate that you do think that would be the center.
Imagine thinking that having a diverse workforce is a good thing is a “far-left idea” and not just helpful for your business because it gives you different perspectives into different possible customers…
Accepting diversity as part of life and not making life more miserable for people just because they don’t look like you or have your same taste, gender or religious beliefs shouldn’t be far left or far anything. It’s just the decent thing to do. It’s ironic how in the US the political side that aligns themselves more closely with radical Christian beliefs is so against that view
Oh I agree, but DEI initiatives are very pro-business specifically. They help increase profits. And these late-stage capitalist assholes don’t even get it.
That part I don’t know. I’m not saying it’s not true, I certainly see the reasoning for why it should be good for business. But the classic conservative counter-argument is that you shouldn’t need to regulate it, because The Mythical Free Market should ensure that companies with a more diverse workforce out-compete the others.
So I prefer to think that sometimes you do things that are right just because you think they are right and even if they cost you. And as part of that, you vote with your wallet and maybe use products that are slightly less shiny and convenient than others because the companies behind them treat people more nicely. And then the Mythical Free Market does also start taking care of things and allowing these nicer companies to survive and even out-compete the Metas of this world. (But we’re all here discussing on Lemmy, so probably I’m already preaching to the choir on this one)
There are two main issues with the large commercial social media platforms. The first is that they do not allow for downvoting. The second is that they maximise engagement rather than quality of posts. The end result is that they consistently push controversial posts (i.e. misinformation).
Factchecking mitigates this but only to a tiny extent. The reason there is far less misinformation on platforms like Lemmy is that content is pushed on the basis of net votes (upvoted minus downvotes) and misinformation tends to be downvoted rapidly.
Ah yes because wanting to not be discriminated against and censoring hate speech is such a woke thing /s
Removed by mod