kjfewhiruhgw's comments

ok have you ever been in a meeting with a group of people where one person dominates the conversation ?

"Let them naturally learn it is bad themselves."

For those readers of such material who are rational critical thinkers, then yes they will see it as bad for themselves and it will leave a bad taste in their mouths, and it will also waste their time

For those with irrational hateful right-wing ideology, it will reinforce their existing miserable attitudes

I agree that censorship is bad. But all publications select their messages. For example, scientific publications don't publish articles on homeopathy or communication with the dead. Are they censoring such material ? Shouldn't they be committed to fair and balanced presentation of ideas ? Aren't they _biased_ towards genuine evidence-based science ?

The reason scientific publications select real science rather than crank bullshit, is that their readers are trying to get real work done, and they rely on peer-review to filter the shit

You have to filter-out the noise in any communication channel. The problem we have with FB & Twitter is that the low signal-to-noise ratio is impeding our decision-making processes