Summary
Meta’s recent shift to right-leaning policies, including ending fact-checking in the U.S., scaling back content moderation, and allowing anti-LGBTQ rhetoric, has sparked boycotts and a user exodus.
The company also disbanded its diversity, equity, and inclusion team, drawing criticism.
Prominent users like director Cord Jefferson and nonprofits like Equal Access Public Media have left or reduced activity on Meta platforms.
Many are migrating to alternatives such as Bluesky, Amigahood, and Tumblr, while some remain trapped due to Meta’s dominance in communication and business.
That’s quite a broad generalization. While this applies to some positions, sure, you seem to be implying it’s true of right-wing views as a whole which simply isn’t true.
I would honestly say that the number of logically coherent and purely right-wing positions is vanishingly small. There are a bunch of right-wing positions that, individually, are logically coherent - but most of them are also part of some left-wing frameworks, so not purely right-wing. Do you have some examples in mind? I’d be happy to be proven wrong!
Even something like being anti-abortion is a perfectly logical stance to hold for someone who beliefs that soul enters the body at conception. That belief is based on what I’d argue is a false premise but I can’t exactly prove that either. It’s not logical from my perspective but it is from theirs.
I’m not so much talking about right wing beliefs per-se but about the shift towards the centre which is to the right. Where it crosses to the side of the right, I don’t know and I doubt there even is concensus on that. Something like being against DEI programs, I guess, is considered to be quite “right wing” yet virtually all of the people whose opinions I respect are against it and I’d hardly consider any of them right wing. Freedom of speech would be another - also fitting the context.