91–100 of 1001 posts
The problem inevitably has flared up: Twitter's head of integrity leading this push has previously tweeted that Trump is a Nazi and accused the flyover states of being racist. https://twitter.com/Liz_Wheeler/status/1265463081997484032 This isn't going to end well, and unless Twitter is going to exercise this impartially (which is impossible given a human is involved), they are going to lose their platform status, and…
It is crazy to see how well he knows his base and how to get them to rally close to an election. Making them think everything is a liberal bias against them, and if they don't vote for his big government agenda they will receive a big government agenda. This is just one more way for him to get his base to believe everything he says versus people who actually prove what he says is a lie. He wants state run media and s…
And this is specifically on a tweet calling the validity of the election into question. It's blatantly wrong, but he needs his base to believe him when he says the election is rigged.
So he just admitted that fact checking is suppressing conservative voices? That's awesome.
He's also admitted that voter suppression is the main reason Republicans even get elected[0]. God help us if we ever get a competent authoritarian into office who's cunning enough not to say the corrupt part out loud. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/30/trump-vot...
I think this is going to be a discussion thread that is almost inevitably going to be a shitshow, but anyway: There are people who advocate the idea that private companies should be compelled to distribute hate speech, dangerously factually incorrect information and harassment under the concept that free speech is should be applied universally rather than just to government. I don't agree, I think it's a vast over-re…
On the other hand, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube et al are undoubtedly massively influential on the public opinion and their corporate position on political topics - Yoel Roth's recent tweets serve as a decent example, showing clearly that this person cannot be an objective "fact checker" - essentially create a public forum where I am not able to exercise my first amendment rights (and, legally speaking, rightfully so). I cannot help but to find this very concerning.
YouTube (despite numerous issues with their interpretation of free speech), for instance, starting linking Wiki articles under videos that cover certain topics or are uploaded by certain channels. Videos by the BBC show a notice that the BBC is a British public broadcast service, simply informing the viewer about the fact that any bias they might encounter can be easily identified (feel free to switch "BBC" with "RT"). I've found that to be a decent middle ground between outright suppressing views by a corporation pretending to be the authority on certain topics and broadcasting everything without any context.
The problem inevitably has flared up: Twitter's head of integrity leading this push has previously tweeted that Trump is a Nazi and accused the flyover states of being racist. https://twitter.com/Liz_Wheeler/status/1265463081997484032 This isn't going to end well, and unless Twitter is going to exercise this impartially (which is impossible given a human is involved), they are going to lose their platform status, and…
What’s “platform status”?
The problem inevitably has flared up: Twitter's head of integrity leading this push has previously tweeted that Trump is a Nazi and accused the flyover states of being racist. https://twitter.com/Liz_Wheeler/status/1265463081997484032 This isn't going to end well, and unless Twitter is going to exercise this impartially (which is impossible given a human is involved), they are going to lose their platform status, and…
What’s “platform status”?
The trouble with Twitter (in some people's view) is that they play both sides- they're just a public platform when there is something illegal that they're hosting, but they're a curator when they don't like what you've posted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's also admitted that voter suppression is the main reason Republicans even get elected[0]. God help us if we ever get a competent authoritarian into office who's cunning enough not to say the corrupt part out loud. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/30/trump-vot...
To your point, Trump being out in the open with his BS is probably what his base likes. I have family members who think that he is a great president, go figure. BTW, I view most politicians from both parties, DNC, and RNC to be corrupt, controlled by special interests. Not to go to far afield here, but I will vote for either a democrat or republican based on public records of who their donors are. Turns out that base…
It is crazy to see how well he knows his base and how to get them to rally close to an election. Making them think everything is a liberal bias against them, and if they don't vote for his big government agenda they will receive a big government agenda. This is just one more way for him to get his base to believe everything he says versus people who actually prove what he says is a lie. He wants state run media and s…
There's a very loud contingent of his base right here on HN.
Weren't all of the nuts supposed to have migrated to Gab or whatever? They stay on Twitter because they seek legitimacy, and know that if they're all together the critical mass of idiocy would be overwhelmed and they would be seen for what they are. Instead you have the fake PhD lady, guy who pisses in his own mouth, and the liar-in-chief all debasing Twitter in an unending torrent.
The internet is decentralized. These people can go elsewhere.
Honestly just more proof that we need decentralization of the Internet. Handing over control of our digital platforms and identities to 3rd party for-profit companies is not the way the internet should work.