• PotentiallyAnApricot@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    I imagine cnn doesn’t want to encourage people to visit the hate account in question by posting a link or screenshot. It doesn’t mean they don’t have proof, it just means they don’t want to drive traffic to hate content. Printing that would be kind of irresponsible. But CNN is known as a pretty reputable news source. I can’t see why they’d lie about it.

    If you aren’t seeing any white supremacy on your own timeline, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, it just means the algorithm isn’t showing it to you, which is a good thing. It might seem surprising, but people do actually search for and deliberately seek out that shit. Hate groups use social media to network, I imagine that’s why CNN didn’t post a screenshot of the account name, or its content.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      But that policy creates a window for literally any accusation to be made. “Proof would encourage or glorify the behavior” basically means you get to accuse anyone of anything at any time .

      • jubalvoid@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 year ago

        The proof is NCTA and Gilead pausing ad spending. This isn’t some crazy conspiracy theory, hate groups have always been on Twitter and musk’s gutting of the moderation and safety teams certainly didn’t make that better. There’s literally no logical reason to think cnn would lie about this, I’m honestly confused why y’all are being weirdly defensive and contrarian over this.

      • PotentiallyAnApricot@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m sorry, but i’m going to have to see this reply as bad faith. There’s no good reason to think the news outlet in question skipped the entire journalistic process and ‘has no proof’, so I can only assume you have another reason for sowing doubt about the legitimacy of the story.