Khaldara t1_j4v8c4t wrote

“Now see here, sharing a resource for the safety and common good of the community’s inhabitants sounds like that there commusocialisms that Tucker told me was the devil in between cash for gold ads and bemoaning the loss of the Snickers dick vein! What if onna them gays or a brown person needs to escape from a polar bear? No siree, no thank you. We ain’t doin that. I’d rather be eviscerated, you know, to own the libs!”


Khaldara t1_j1e9rfb wrote

Yeah, I mean common sense dictates that it almost needs to be true by virtue of these platforms seeking profitability as well. The right wing is the minority party by population, it also trends older and rural (both segments of the population that are further less likely to be online as persistently).

Consequently if their content wasn’t being amplified, you’d presumably naturally encounter right wing stuff at much lower rates by virtue of its overall representation in the digital space. But companies thrive off “engagement”, regardless of whether it’s positive or not. So the bickering and internet fighting right wing content provides drives it higher than it’d presumably otherwise be.

This of course does absolutely nothing to dissuade their pundits from going on the largest traditional media outlets on the planet to whine about being “canceled” and “silenced”, whilst holding a microphone and staring into a camera.