I think that is misdirection.
There are two parts that I don't think are contradicted by this article:
1) Facebook, twitter, and other social networks give people a voice and a community.
2) If these platforms are censored in a country, it has a great effect on free speech in the country.
Now, there are some good questions related to the article to ask here:
a) Are these platforms actually a problem because of the amplification of outraging?
b) If they are, how does that impact our society?
c) Is there a way to empower people (and keep the benefits of current platforms) without increasing the negative effects as well?
There are two parts that I don't think are contradicted by this article:
1) Facebook, twitter, and other social networks give people a voice and a community.
2) If these platforms are censored in a country, it has a great effect on free speech in the country.
Now, there are some good questions related to the article to ask here:
a) Are these platforms actually a problem because of the amplification of outraging?
b) If they are, how does that impact our society?
c) Is there a way to empower people (and keep the benefits of current platforms) without increasing the negative effects as well?