Peter BarnesHere’s a question for social-media ethicists: is re-broadcasting someone else’s post/tweet/toot/whatever, but with the addition of a content warning a) ethical b) better than no boost c) worse than no boost d) what fresh hell is this
~@infinite8horizon following thread for interest
Ross Gayler@RossGayler @adamdalywaters
Well, I have to say I'm disappointed at the silence. I've had a couple of other posts (one photographic, one political) receive a fair amount of engagement (for me), but apparently nobody with any ethics follows me (deliberately provocative statement).
The question's genuine, borne out of the tension between various marginalized and oppressed groups who see CWs on their posts as a means of continuing their oppression and suppression for the moral comfort of the unoppressed; and the goal of allowing people to choose whether or not to have triggering, confronting or unwanted content pushed in their faces, à la bird site.
I often see posts that I'd like to boost, but that I don't because my online etiquette suggests they don't constitute (say) oppression, but simply content that people might reasonably want to avoid. Spiders, say. The problem obviously arises if I boost posts about, say, racism, but choose to hide them behind a CW. Currently I can't do that, and the question therefore is: would it be ethical, or if ethical, wise, to provide that facility.
It's not obvious to me. I lean towards having it, but like everything if the damage from abuse outweighs the utility from correct use, possibly better not to.
Dunno.
@infinite8horizon @adamdalywaters
That sounds to me like a trolley problem, and my general response to trolley problems is to burn down the trolley and everyone who rode into town on it.
When *I* apply a CW I don't think of it as a "content warning". Instead, I think of it as equivalent to an email subject, which is there to allow the recipient to determine if they want to engage with the contents. I might apply a CW for sensitivity, but also for reasons like being too long, boring, or esoteric to interest a reasonable chunk of recipients. For the same reason I also tend to add a froth of hashtags when I add a CW to improve discoverability and better allow the recipient to decide whether to engage.
The principle behind those choices is that boosting is aimed at spreading the post to a wider audience than that reached by the original poster - so the focus is on the needs of the recipients.
@RossGayler @adamdalywaters
I agree with your “Subject” analogy, that’s much how I see it also. If the trolley is full of utilitarians, absolutely… I have to mull the rest.
I agree with your “Subject” analogy, that’s much how I see it also. If the trolley is full of utilitarians, absolutely… I have to mull the rest.