Comment by mastazi
2 years ago
I don't think that parent is suggesting that platforms are actively prioritising one over the other.
I think they are saying that the composition of users of these apps skews one way rather than the other due to pre existing stances, and the fact that the apps are not available in some markets.
As a result, certain views are prioritised as a byproduct of the fact that all modern social media apps have an algorithm that shows you more of what you already agree with, in order to maximise ad profits.
I think your interpretation is wrong.
OP stated: "If anything the skew within the platforms is to prioritize pro-palestinian views".
They're explicitly stating that they believe pro-palestinian views are prioritized.
I don't see how that quote from OP is incompatible with my point, please explain
> They're explicitly stating that they believe pro-palestinian views are prioritized.
I'm also saying that they are prioritised, here is a sentence from my previous comment:
> As a result, certain views are prioritised
Prioritized in what exact way? You are fed what you are interested in and like, on TikTok. It is easy to read yourself of topics or content you are uninterested in or dislike.
Make a brand new account and visit TikTok. You will be shown lots of pro Palestinian content
1 reply →
> “If anything”
This is an important clause here. It means that they do not believe that pro-Israel views are prioritised but __if__ any it is the case that there are prioritised views are pro-Palestinian views.
Now, you could argue that this is a bad faith rhetorical device but it is not “explicitly stating that they believe pro-Palestinian views are prioritised”.
[flagged]
1 reply →
The majority of the world is against Israel's occupation of Palestine, a stance that is reflected in numerous UN General Assembly votes. Holding a pro-Israel position in this context represents a very US centric view, which is not similarly echoed in the rest of the world.
No, the majority of the world is against Israel's occupation of the West Bank, and until 2005 when Israel left Gaza, its occupation of Gaza.
The October 7th attack was carried out against civilians in their homes living on land that is internationally recognized as Israel by an overwhelming majority of countries.
> No, the majority of the world is against Israel's occupation of the West Bank, and until 2005 when Israel left Gaza, its occupation of Gaza.
I'm not sure what you are opposing. I wrote that majority of the world is against Israel's occupation. And it's not only West Bank, this is map showing all the lands occupied by Israel with timeline https://i.stack.imgur.com/0xM5P.jpg
> The October 7th attack was carried out against civilians in their homes living on land that is internationally recognized as Israel by an overwhelming majority of countries.
Pro Palestine doesn't mean pro Hamas or pro terrorist. Here is another general assembly vote, from 26th October where majority of the world voted differently than Israel, and in favor of Palestine:
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/10/1142847
15 replies →
Last month UN appointed Iran to chair and guide its annual UNHRC (human rights council) meeting.
The aforementioned organization in no way represents “the majority of the world” or “the rest of the world”; it makes a joke out of the values of freedom and human rights.
>The majority of the world is against Israel's occupation of Palestine
The majority of the global ruling class is for Israel's occupation of Palestine.
History is incomprehensible if we ignore class conflict.
Can you define who the global ruling class is?
> I think they are saying that the composition of users of these apps skews one way rather than the other due to pre existing stances
I think the notion that the vast chunk of Twitter or TikTok had a pre existing stance on Israel/Palestine before Oct 7 is kind of silly, imo? Before this I could scroll Twitter without seeing anything about Israel or Palestine for... idk. Weeks, months at a time. I'll maybe see one thing on Palestine being oppressed, usually about West Bank settlements, from the one or two people who happen to be Palestinian. Now I literally cannot avoid it whenever I open either app.
I really struggle to believe anyone beyond a small minority even thought about Palestine or Israel before Oct 7.
> I really struggle to believe anyone beyond a small minority even thought about Palestine or Israel before Oct 7.
It has been a relatively prominent issue in Ireland, and especially Northern Ireland for some time. You can find plenty of images over the years of republican murals with Palestinian flags on them (e.g. 10 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/189yeg/o... ), or conversely unionist bonfires with palestinean flags on it: (e.g. last year https://nitter.dafriser.be/M_AndersonSF/status/1542523209311... )
As OP pointed out, a billion Muslims is a lot of people. They may not have the palestinians at top of mind all the time, but a lot of them do at the moment.
[flagged]
14 replies →
> I really struggle to believe anyone beyond a small minority even thought about Palestine or Israel before Oct 7.
I grew up in the 1980s and recall intense flareups on this subject matter for as long as I can remember. The arrival of the Web and social media simply amplified them.
This is the correct view. The Palestinian issue is a deeply-felt issue for a quarter of the world's population, give or take.
51 replies →
> I really struggle to believe anyone beyond a small minority even thought about Palestine or Israel before Oct 7.
This appeared repeatedly as important news, sadly mostly due to wars and terrorism.
Jerusalem relevance alone for multiple religions with its holy sites made it important topic for many.
People being aware of the issue isn't the same as the issue being their primary interest. Or even being in their top ten interests.
1 reply →
I think you are underestimating the diversity of these global platforms.
As an example, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are among the top 10 countries in terms of Twitter users.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/242606/number-of-active-...
This conflict has been a huge thing since the 90s. I would argue the vast majority of people in the west had an opinion on that conflict.
Since 1948, when modern Israel was founded.
37 replies →
I think it's pretty unfair this person is being down voted.
Yes, most Americans knew the conflict existed previous to this past October, but few who weren't Jewish or Muslim and/or Arab (I think most Arab Christians are generally/vaguely pro-Palestinian, but not sure) would have had strong opinions about it or been able to tell you much. I don't think the issue has ever featured this heavily in the US news cycle since oil embargoes in the 70s, and the issue is a lot more contentious now due to a few different factors.
Right now, unless someone consumes zero news media and has very curated social media feeds, I don't see how they could avoid understanding this has all been a major geopolitical event that is continuing to unfold.
> few…would have had strong opinions about it or been able to tell you much
That’s simply incorrect. Extensive news coverage of the flareups I referred to led to the subject matter becoming a common topic of conversation and public interest. Heck, I remember there being conversations and debates about it among kids in my school’s cafeteria, and that was in a part of the US where at the time way less than 1% of the population was Jewish or Muslim.