Updates to the Facebook post

content/posts/20-07-09-facebook.md

@@ -108,17 +108,19 @@ This alone is a win, but the further pipedream would be to decentralize them so
 
 Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Reddit created incredibly engaging social experiences. They no doubt continue to exploit human pyschology to do so but nevertheless they've succeeded many times over in creating global communities that keep people coming back _a lot_. While they became incredibly popular, however, their authority somehow also grew with them and we've completely forgotten their founding as fun social activities. **This was a huge mistake.**
 
-These sites are fun to use but are woefully inadequate as "serious" communication tools; treating them as such and censoring content so that they can remain authoritative is a fool's errand. Re-framing them as social websites removes all of the pressure they have to censor and regulate speech. Delegating responsibility to maintain order onto the small local communities within them also relieves significant pressure. Reducing instead of maximizing the degrees of relationships from whom users see content keeps it more _social_. Seeing it as fun might also help us to not get offended over everything we see. 
+These sites are fun to use but are woefully inadequate as "serious" communication tools; treating them as such and censoring content so that they can remain authoritative is a fool's errand. Re-framing them as social websites that [journalists no longer consider authoritative sources of news](https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/journalists-on-twitter-study.php) and opinion removes much of the pressure they have to censor and regulate speech. If users stop taking it _so_ seriously the radicalizing and outrage and demands and vitriol wither. If advertisers stop taking it _so_ seriously and bending the knee to every outrage or protest, the tiny demand-making minority's undue influence also withers.
 
-No one petitions Snapchat or Discord or even Instagram to censor speech, in large part because they're still seen as fun and not authoritative sources of information or where our _president_ feels the need to make official announcements.
+Delegating responsibility to maintain order onto the small local communities within them also relieves significant pressure. Reducing, instead of _maximizing_, the degrees of relationships from whom users see content keeps it more _social_ and help vastly improve the serious lack of mutual respect and basic decorum in online communication. Seeing it as fun might also help us to not get offended over everything we see. 
+
+No one petitions Snapchat or Discord or even Instagram to censor speech, in large part because they're still seen as fun, local, and social—not broad authoritative sources of information where our _president_ feels the need to make official announcements.
 
 ### Decentralization, though a pipedream, is the true fix
 
-When Grandpa sends an offensive email forward, Email, Inc. doesn't ban him from Email. We delete it at first and if it starts to become too annoying we filter it, tell him to stop, or block him on our personal block list. 
+When Grandpa forwards an offensive email, Email, Inc. doesn't ban him from Email. We delete the email at first and if he starts to become too annoying we filter them, tell him to stop, or block him on our personal block list. 
 
-There is no corporate entity controlling Email with its centralized Email servers, shareholders requiring 10% growth every quarter, dark patterns driving Email adoption and use, and datamining. If we want to create an email account we don't have to do it on Email.com, we can do it with any provider (or ourselves!) as long as we interoperate over a published email protocol. 
+There is no corporate entity controlling Email with centralized Email servers, shareholders requiring 10% growth every quarter, dark patterns driving Email adoption and use, and PMs datamining every eyeball shift. If we want to create an email account we don't have to do it on Email.com, we can do it with any provider (or ourselves!) as long as we interoperate over a published email protocol. 
 
-Replace "Email" with Twitter in the preceding paragraph and we have the real fix to social media's censorship problem, among many other problems. When Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Reddit are merely content aggregators, filters, and user interfaces over their respective networks, censorship is moot. If you want a safe space on the official facebook.com or twitter.com instances then you are absolutely entitled to that, but the censorship there would not then impact what I get to read and engage with over the `FB://` or `TWTR://` protocols.
+Replace "Email" with Twitter in the preceding paragraph and we have the real fix to social media's censorship problem, among many other problems. When Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Reddit are merely competitive content aggregators, filters, and user interfaces over their respective networks, censorship is moot. If you want a safe space on the official facebook.com or twitter.com instances then you are absolutely entitled to that, but the censorship there would not then impact what I get to read and engage with over the `FB://` or `TWTR://` protocols.
 
 This is federated, decentralized communication over an official protocol. There are attempts to do this now [that I fully support](https://gioia.social/@andrew) and would love to see grow, but as long as the monopolies remain unfair monopolies they have too steep of a hill to climb.