I'm confused. What's an example of a tweet from a government official which breaks the rules but deserves to be kept up?
https://twitter.com/Policy/status/912438046515220480
Holy shit the responses to that tweet are basically all culled
Defining Public Interest on Twitter
31–40 of 80 posts
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#32I'm confused. What's an example of a tweet from a government official which breaks the rules but deserves to be kept up?
I suspect the answer is less “deserves to be kept up” and more “mustn't be pulled down lest we risk the wrath of or lose the attention caused by having the author”. Can you imagine if Twitter suspended the current President of the United States? They'd have the Republican political machine at their throats and lose a ton of attention and thus ad revenue that they currently get from his tweets.
My understanding is that the president's tweets have also been found to be essentially public property, meaning twitter cannot take them down anyway
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#33This is one big reason Twitter hasn't been (and may not be) acquired. Who needs this headache and expense? This isn't as disturbing as Vimeo's takedown of Project Veritas, or the bias exposed in their video, but the trend is seriously alarming.
Project Veritas is nonsense. Nothing they have ever reported has been factual. Good on them for removing it.
I never understood the blind obedience towards Google vs. pretty much every other tech company. Is it historical?
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#34>We're not going to delete it but we're going to algorithmically prevent discovery Tech monoliths like facebook, google, and twitter are starting to show very obvious political biases. If we push them to be equitable to differing opinions, they basically get to continue enforcing their own political biases because we can only ever do blackbox testing. God knows what the backend is doing. If we push them to own their…
> Tech monoliths like facebook, google, and twitter are starting to show very obvious political biases.
How is this policy political bias? If one political group makes more calls to violence or for discrimination than another perhaps the problem is with the group, not Twitter.
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#35>We're not going to delete it but we're going to algorithmically prevent discovery Tech monoliths like facebook, google, and twitter are starting to show very obvious political biases. If we push them to be equitable to differing opinions, they basically get to continue enforcing their own political biases because we can only ever do blackbox testing. God knows what the backend is doing. If we push them to own their…
On the other hand:
If your political stance violates the TOS that is enforced on non-public offical users, is it really "political bias"? Maybe you should rethink your politics if bullying, inciting violence, and inciting hate speech is part of your position.
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which of Twitter's rules do you think are inappropriate? https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules
It's not that they're inappropriate, it's that they will be enforced selectively.
I do agree with you on this. Especially this rule.
Abuse/harassment: You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. This includes wishing or hoping that someone experiences physical harm.
Obviously there is a gray area where people use 'groups' rather than individuals to claim they are not targeting people.
I.E. I wish people would kill John Smith vs I wish all white people would die.
Twitter Verified Hate - https://www.label56.com/wp-content/uploads/verified-hate-1.j...
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect the answer is less “deserves to be kept up” and more “mustn't be pulled down lest we risk the wrath of or lose the attention caused by having the author”. Can you imagine if Twitter suspended the current President of the United States? They'd have the Republican political machine at their throats and lose a ton of attention and thus ad revenue that they currently get from his tweets.
My understanding is that the president's tweets have also been found to be essentially public property, meaning twitter cannot take them down anyway
Twitter can take them down as they wish. It is upon the office of the president to archive his tweets.
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#38When a offensive twit with 1 million plus followers that gets news about why it was not moderated, this will shut up those high horse talkers.
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#39>We're not going to delete it but we're going to algorithmically prevent discovery Tech monoliths like facebook, google, and twitter are starting to show very obvious political biases. If we push them to be equitable to differing opinions, they basically get to continue enforcing their own political biases because we can only ever do blackbox testing. God knows what the backend is doing. If we push them to own their…
> Tech monoliths like facebook, google, and twitter are starting to show very obvious political biases. How is this policy political bias? If one political group makes more calls to violence or for discrimination than another perhaps the problem is with the group, not Twitter.
Because political advocacy groups consult Twitter on what constitutes violations: https://about.twitter.com/en_us/safety/safety-partners.html
Re: Defining Public Interest on Twitter
#40>When a Tweet has this notice placed on it, it will feature less prominently on Twitter, and not appear in [...] Timeline when switched to Top Tweets
Oh good, another reason to always sort chronologically (until Twitter removes the ability to do so)