A nonprofit organization that researches links between social media, hate and extremism has been threatened with a lawsuit by X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.

A nonprofit organization that researches links between social media, hate and extremism has been threatened with a lawsuit by X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.

  • Rottcodd@kbin.social
    11·
    11 months ago

    It’s the very definition of having a conclusion you want and then working backwards to try and confirm it no matter how.

    I love unintentional irony.

      • AnonTwo@kbin.social
        1·
        11 months ago

        The irony is that you misread the article, quoted parts while still misreading the article, allowing everyone to see that you misread the article

        Then made an argument that only works provided nobody else noticed you misread the article

        Which would be a form of cherrypicking.

        Because you have stepped over that it’s “Grooming Narrative” and not “Grooming” every single post since that one. The conversation is the hate speech, not the specific word.

        • Whirlybird
          1·
          11 months ago

          I didn’t misread the article though, so your entire premise falls apart.

          The conversation is the hate speech, not the specific word.

          Like I said, they didn’t check “the narrative”. They did searches finding combinations of words. To this study, a tweet saying “LGBT people stand against grooming kids!” would count as a “hate speech” post 🤣. If 100 people retweeted that, it counts as 101 “hate speech” occurrences.

          You don’t see the issues with that?