Lushington D. Brady: Not the “Hate” They Were Hoping For

The vast bulk of hate on Facebook targets white men

When Planet of the Apes’ displaced astronaut, Taylor, begs for an answer to the mystery of just what planet he’s landed on, wise monkey Dr Zaius warns him: Don’t look for it, Taylor. You may not like what you find.

When he saw the Statue of Liberty in ruins, Taylor certainly did not like it. The truth is a confronting thing. That’s why so many people prefer hiding in a bubble of comforting illusions rather than confronting the harsh truth.

Especially the woke left.

When UK leftist politicians commissioned a study into “misogynist abuse” on Twitter, they most certainly didn’t like what they found: half of the “misogynistic abuse” was sent by women and girls. Instead of admitting that, though, they tried to explain it away.

Just like the race-baiting mainstream media, when it comes to online racism. Under pressure from the race-industry, Facebook set up an algorithm to detect hate speech on its platform. They didn’t like what they found.

Roughly 90 per cent of “hate speech” subject to content takedowns were statements of contempt, inferiority and disgust directed at White people and men.

Racist posts against minorities weren’t what Facebook’s own hate speech detection algorithms were most commonly finding. The software, which the company introduced in 2015, was supposed to detect and automatically delete hate speech before users saw it. Publicly, the company said in 2019 that its algorithms proactively caught more than 80 per cent of hate speech.

But this statistic hid a serious problem that was obvious to researchers: The algorithm was aggressively detecting comments denigrating White people more than attacks on every other group, according to several of the documents. One April 2020 document said roughly 90 per cent of “hate speech” subject to content takedowns were statements of contempt, inferiority and disgust directed at White people and men.

The race industry were no more going to admit this harsh truth, though, than they will about crime rates or IQ.

Researchers also found in 2019 that the hate speech algorithms were out of step with actual reports of harmful speech on the platform. In that year, the researchers discovered that 55 per cent of the content users reported to Facebook as most harmful was directed at just four minority groups.

See the bait and switch, here? Users reporting content is literal human selection bias in action. Take the human bias out of the equation and instead run a computer algorithm that’s colour-blind, and the real picture emerges.

One of the reasons for these errors, the researchers discovered, was that Facebook’s “race-blind” rules of conduct on the platform didn’t distinguish among the targets of hate speech.

Whereas the biased media and race-industry very much do. These are, after all, the same people who will state that it’s “impossible to be racist toward white people” (which is, in itself, a racist argument).

Even more damaging to the race-baiting left’s comforting delusions, is the fact that its self-selected “10 worst examples” of “hate speech” offended even White conservatives.

These findings about the most objectionable content held up even among self-identified White conservatives that the market research team traveled to visit in Southern states.

The Washington Post

The obvious conclusion of this is that even Southern White conservatives are disgusted by hateful racism.

But the race-baiting media would sooner die than admit that.

Lushington describes himself as Punk rock philosopher. Liberalist contrarian. Grumpy old bastard. This article was first published HERE