I guess what I’m saying is that I’ll think twice before deciding something isn’t for someone to the point where I’d have to interfere without their own knowledge and consent (as opposed to talking to them).

The problem with censorship is that one always assumes they are correct and the other person is deluded. In many cases, like this one, it could be true. In others, it’s not. My point was to take caution when deciding something about someone’s life.

Exactly, no one said that.

I guess despite them being Qanon, I still see and believe in the human in them, and their ultimate right to believe stupid shit. I don’t think it’s ever ‘overthinking’ when it comes to another human being’s privacy and freedom. I actually think it’s bizarre to quickly jump into this and decide to alter the subscriptions behind their back like they’re a 2 year old child with not even perception to understand basic shit.

I think this is pretty much what it boils down to. Where do you draw the line between having the right to expose yourself to media that validates your world view and this media becoming a threat to you to a point where you require intervention?

I’ve seen lots of people discussion their family’s Qanon casualties to recognize it’s a legitimate problem, not to mention tragic in many cases, but I would still think twice before ‘tricking’ someone. What if she realizes what’s happening and becomes more radicalized by this? I find that direct conversation, discussion, and confrontation work better; or at least that worked with family that believes in bullshit.

That being said, the harmful effects of being trapped in a bubble by an algorithm are not largely disputed.

And why are they demanding it? Just scrape it like the rest of us.

This is a suggestion with questionable morality BUT a new account with reasonable subscriptions might be a good solution. That being said, if my child was trying to patronize me about my conspiracy theories, I wouldn’t like it, and would probably flip if they try to change my accounts.