Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter to ban political advertising

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#271

Post by heylook »

product50 wrote: post #254

So why not use the same methodology on TV or print as well and ban political ads across? Why is social media singled out here? What about ads on YouTube? This is nothing but a copout solution. Twitter doesn't have the will nor the capital to be part of the debate here (and political ads are likely too small for them to care) - so they are trying to gain strategy credit by just saying this is a bad idea. NYTimes is ha…

IMO the difference is a combination of two things:

* the unprecedented targeting ability of social media ads vs traditional broadcast/print * the unprecedented amount of disinformation (especially from foreign governments) vs traditional broadcast/print

If you can't see the difference between the two, frankly, you haven't been paying attention.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#273

Post by iikoolpp »

blotter_paper wrote: post #117
aakilfernandes wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why a blockchain is needed for this. Can't they just have an API where certain posts are "flagged" and hidden in the official UI? If you want to opt-out, you simply use a UI that doesn't hide flagged.

Yeah, but then they could be ordered to take it down. I think the idea is to be censorship resistant in such a way that the company itself cannot make exceptions when pressured by a court, but I'm forgetting if that's me reading between the lines or if Dorsey explicitly talks about censorship resistance.

Telling the government "I know you've told me to take it down, but we specifically designed it in such a way that we can't take it down" sounds like an incredibly good legal strategy that will definitely not backfire.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#274

Post by triceratops »

catalogia wrote: post #65
notatoad wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't really criticise twitter for this - last year they were all ready to launch a way to embed text posts in a tweet like images can currently be embedded in a tweet, until the userbase revolted and they had to cancel the plan.

Really? The twitter userbase actually prefers it this way? That's baffling to me. Did the revolting userbase provide any reasons or explanations for this preference?

> revolting userbase

There's no need to insult every single Twitter user like that :-)

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#275

Post by Mountain_Skies »

nlh wrote: post #74

Bravo. That whole thread is smart, well-reasoned, and puts democracy above profits. Good for them. I particularly like his last point: > A final note. This isn’t about free expression. This is about paying for reach. And paying to increase the reach of political speech has significant ramifications that today’s democratic infrastructure may not be prepared to handle. It’s worth stepping back in order to address. Whic…

Thought I don't have an objection to Twitter not accepting political advertising, their rationalization sounds like they're saying voters are too stupid to figure out what to believe so it's best if they are put in a bubble. It's interesting how closely this matches the arguments against labeling GMO foods because consumers are too stupid to decide for themselves if GMO food is harmless or not.

We love democracy. We love freedom. We love choice. But mostly in theory and not so much in practice when it comes to the masses. Anyone seen Napoleon, Squealer, and Snowball hanging around?

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#276

Post by munk-a »

product50 wrote: post #254

So why not use the same methodology on TV or print as well and ban political ads across? Why is social media singled out here? What about ads on YouTube? This is nothing but a copout solution. Twitter doesn't have the will nor the capital to be part of the debate here (and political ads are likely too small for them to care) - so they are trying to gain strategy credit by just saying this is a bad idea. NYTimes is ha…

Unless another recourse is found then banning all political ads will increase the role prior name recognition plays in politics. It is difficult for lesser known politicians to overcome incumbents and this would make it even more difficult.

Another recourse, would, for example, be unbiased open debates where candidates can promote themselves, I think this is a great idea personally but it won't work without

1. Public funding.

2. Actual enforcement of the unbiased natures of these debates.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#277

Post by SauciestGNU »

octonion wrote: post #207
dmix wrote: post #162

One thing about the first amendment is that it doesn't have conditions. This type of thing that Twitter is doing will be full of them, ie selectively defining what's political or not. The question is whether this is a lesser evil than allowing political ads but selectively blocking stuff with very broad and potentially inconsistent moderation rules. I personally think totally blocking is the easier of the two in term…

The First Amendment is about government suppression of speech. Furthermore, deliberate lies are (legally) not legitimate speech.

It would be more accurate to say that deliberate lies are sometimes not free speech as decided by the courts. These circumstances include false advertising, libel, and slander.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#278

Post by iikoolpp »

buboard wrote: post #155
blotter_paper wrote: post #76

I don't agree with every call Twitter makes, but I find Dorsey to be by far the most interesting public figure in the social media game. His two JRE interviews[0][1] and his Tales from the Crypto interview[2] are all worth checking out, IMO. He seems to think Twitter should use a blockchain in the future, and that small social circles should have a system for internally moderating content without needing it to be oka…

Dorsey espouses some very libertarian views and yet he's generally leaning left of course. Still , he s the only one who dares give Trump a megaphone. I think he handles the whole situation exceptionally well.

> and yet he's generally leaning left of course

Words clearly do not have meanings anymore

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#280

Post by mrtksn »

greenshackle2 wrote: post #107
tyre wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the American Cancer Society can advocate for itself but not for candidates or policies. Fine: Donate to fight cancer Not fine: Donate to Candidate X to support cancer research

What good or service is "Donate to fight cancer" advertising?

Sounds like a Kickstarter for a cancer cure, it's a legit service.
Post reply on HN