Hi new user here. I’ve been checking out Lemmy but the amount of bias is ruining it for me. For example the front page right now has 7 out of 20 submissions that contain the word Trump in a negative context. I don’t care about Trump but when the front page is all political posts attacking Trump I have to wonder about the health of the site.

In the most simple sense, could Republican submissions survive on Lemmy politics community ignoring the voting behavior or would the site and moderators itself actively suppress it to “keep the peace”? I think this gets to the heart of the question and again, this isn’t political to me, it’s purely mechanical. I think that if a social media site has a community called “politics” that is solely made up of stories promoting one party while shitting on the other then the entire site is inherently flawed. It isn’t being genuine in what it offers and is incapable of providing it.

It’s like if you had a community named “cars” but you’re only allowed to talk positively about certain manufacturers. Imagine most people either like Ford or Chevy but on the “cars” community it “just so happens” that everyone there likes Ford.

You can post about Chevy but you have to be careful about how reliable the information is. You have an article that says Chevy’s new SUV produces 500 horsepower? Well, that source isn’t reliable. In fact this Ford biased source did a study showing it only produces 400 horsepower. You think that isn’t a reliable source? This Ford biased bias checker agrees that your Chevy source is biased but our Ford source is not biased. No, we can’t just give people information and let them decide for themselves. That’s dangerous. We can only give them our rock solid Ford sources in order to protect humanity.

Did you comment that you sometimes prefer Chevy for certain things? Well, in this Ford biased community that’s not going to go over well. Now you have 1000 downvotes and 100 comments calling you an idiot. Try to defend your opinions? Too bad, you can only respond every 15 minutes. You have too many downvotes. Well, look at that, the dumb Chevy poster realized he is a moron and had nothing to say in response. Clearly the Ford posters were right again. After all, just look at all those downvotes and comments and the Chevy poster didn’t even reply.

So what do you end up with?

You get a “cars” community, a “ford” community, and a “chevy” community but you’re not allowed to talk about Chevy in cars. You can only organically talk about Chevy in the Chevy community. That is until the site administrators start getting involved and deciding that really it isn’t safe for humanity to let Chevy people talk about Chevy in the Chevy community. They’ve been posting unreliable sources in there, using bad language towards Ford posters, and so on. It’s a dangerous hate community so we’re going to shut it down. You can talk about Chevy in the cars community if you want.

Then you get biased Ford stories under the “cars” community showing up on the front page. Anyone who prefers Chevy will never have their submissions seen because it is relegated to a smaller community that algorithmically won’t show up. If it somehow does get big and popular enough the admins step in and boot it or artificially step on promoting it.

Again, I don’t care about politics and you can substitute Biden for Trump and make comparisons to other social media sites. I’m simply asking if Lemmy is offering anything different with regards to this situation.

Can someone explain how it is different from the Reddit moderator and suppression rules? So far Lemmy is producing the same biased garbage I see on Reddit so I’d like to know if this is a function of Lemmy itself like it is on Reddit or if it’s just echos of Reddit that could one day go away. Is Lemmy something new or is it just for people who loved NuReddit but are mad about the API changes?

  • whyisitalways@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah and that is what I’m talking about. It is frankly disgusting to have to read all this dehumanzing one sided garbage. The comments in this thread are perfect examples of dehumanizing people and using that as a justification for bias. “No reasonable person supports Republicans” and “Republicans have never done anything to garner support from rational people.” It is the shift from “we disagree about things that impact our lives” to “you are completely crazy and wrong about everything so you deserve whatever I do to you.”

    erase people from existence and force women to make health choices

    Biased Republicans would say similar things. That you shouldn’t complain if Republicans are shitting on Democrats because they’re the party that wants to let drag queens molest children and start WW3 in Ukraine or whatever. Normally when two people talk they can realize that the other person is in fact just a person like them and you can be empathic towards each other. This isn’t happening though because the people working themselves into a frenzy about “the other” are kept isolated and encouraged to keep going down that path of irrational hatred.

    We have social media platforms actively separating people and promoting their thinking that the other side are deranged lunatics who need to be exterminated or severely restricted using the power of the government. This is really wrong and I’m hoping Lemmy can offer an alternative similar to the origins of social media where people could share and talk, that’s it, we didn’t have heavy handed moderators, admins, and algorithms getting in the middle of everything and creating isolated bubbles of people dehumanizing each other.

    • shogoll@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a false equivalency to compare Republicans saying Democrats support drag queen child molestations or WWIII in Ukraine or whatever and Democrats claiming Republicans want to force women to make health choices.

      Because Democrats haven’t passed any laws which would allow drag queen child molestation or induce WWIII in Ukraine, while Republicans actively campaigned for and managed to successfully repeal Roe vs Wade.

      Like, do you see how one side’s accusation has more concrete evidence than the other?

      • whyisitalways@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        The law hasn’t seemed to matter much lately. You could use illegal immigration as an example. The law says it’s illegal but Democrats as a party have openly supported people who break this law and generally ignore that it is being broken. Sometimes even encouraging people to break the law in public forum. You could use drug laws as another example. Democrats openly supporting people who use or abuse drugs from a health, safety, social care perspective but ignoring that they’re the ones supposedly writing the laws they claim to be protecting people against. Republicans, including Trump, have sort of rebranded into the “party of the law” because of this.

        This is relevant because Republicans, as the party of the law, use the law to effect change. The Democrats, as a party that promotes caring for people over the letter of the law, often does not use the law explicitly to effect change. They use interpretation. Therefore your response is that Republicans are passing laws that hurt certain people so it can’t be possible that Democrats are similarly bad. Except that ignores things like Biden even having the privilege to deploy troops in Ukraine. It ignores all the things that happen outside of the law and within interpretation of the law and how the courts work in the real world that isn’t simply “passing a new law.”

        • jeffw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Illegal immigration, for the vast majority of our history, has been a misdemeanor. Our nation is founded on white people stealing land. Who are we to refuse others?

          I have no idea what you mean about Dems not changing laws though.

          • whyisitalways@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is a difference between “refusing others” and allowing people to illegally enter the country and participate in society getting identification, holdings jobs, etc. In fact I find Democrats support of this disgusting because it is exploitative. They love to have illegal immigrants come here and give them just enough so they can go work on a farm or in a factory but not actually make them citizens capable of obtaining labor protections and not just being fodder for corporations.

            • jeffw@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Weird, the Dems I know are all talking about those issues of expediting a path to citizenship. Idk which Dems you’re talking to

              • watson387@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                He isn’t talking to any. He’s regurgitating right wing talking points. His entire argument is in bad faith. He’s a troll.

    • jeffw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Explain to me how a Republican would say Democrats are trying to erase people from existence.

      • whyisitalways@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Democrats are trying to groom children into being gay by letting drag queens molest them Democrats are trying to start WW3 in Ukraine

        You do remember that our Democrat administration is pushing for cluster bombs in Ukraine? How does that compare to transgender rights in America?

        This is a common tactic to demonize your opponent and it was widely demonstrated during the BLM protests. It was repeated all over the nation at these protests whenever anyone criticized something like burning down buildings. “How can you care about burning down buildings when black bodies are being killed in the streets?”

        This emotional appeal to DEATH. People are DYING. We can’t be RATIONAL because people are DYING and THEY are the ones causing it! Meanwhile the people saying this turn a blind eye to the forever wars America is engaged in resulting in millions of death. Literally cluster bombs are being rolled out and you don’t hear a beep suddenly about “people are dying.”

        If I point things out like this I become a Republican in the mind of the deranged Democrat biased poster. That’s fine but it works the same for biased moderators and admins who start to thumb the scales. It also works the other way if you go point out legitimate criticism of Republicans in biased Republican forums.

        This is a discussion of bias not political beliefs.

        • jeffw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Except democrats are not trying to groom children, whereas the GOP has enacted anti-trans and anti-healthcare policies. One statement is a conspiracy, the other is based on facts. You’ll find more facts on Lemmy

          Also, the GOP is traditionally the more hawk-ish party lol. Just because a few loud voices are pro-Putin doesn’t make them doves.

          • whyisitalways@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because I’m right and they’re wrong. Also even though Democrats are committing war crimes usually it is the Republicans.

            There is one party from where I stand partner.