Live data from Hacker News

Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

techcrunch.com

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#221

"Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices" Reddit is the best example of that. I don't want to defend him but look at every single news and politics related sub from /r/news, /r/worldnews, /r/politics etc. But that happens here too. Honestly I blame the upvote downvote system more. Reddit and HN are both really wrong with it

The very same Reddit where criticism frequently gets you banned or censored in subreddits like /r/conservative ?

Just because the majority in a particular community disagrees with you doesn't make you censored or silenced.

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#223
post #170

However you feel about this, Twitter did it in pretty much the worst way possible. 1. They had someone with a clear history of strong anti-Trump and anti-Republican sentiment take the action ( https://twitter.com/LevineJonathan/status/126545757821512499... ) 2. Twitter chose a prediction rather than a factual statement to fact check ("Mail-In Ballots will be..."). Why not start with a truly factually wrong statement…

Wow a comment that isn't just calling trump a racist and is calmly laying out the facts....

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#224

Can this even be considered a free speech issue? They aren't deleting his tweet, only displaying it alongside a fact check. Of course you can try to call into question the impartiality of the fact check but that is a long way from not deciding not to show the content.

Not only does it not seem to be a free speech issue to me, from my point of view this is basically the best-case scenario for avoiding censorship of contentious issues on dominant platforms like Facebook/Twitter. It's the obvious conclusion to arguments like, "the way to deal with bad speech is with more good speech."

Twitter saw speech they disagreed with, and they fixed it with more speech. They haven't censored any of Trump's arguments, they didn't delete his tweets. They just added their own commentary on top of them. That's what Republicans have always claimed they wanted. Argue that people are wrong, don't censor them. Don't throw people off the platform, add a fact-check.

I grew up listening to Republicans rail against the Fairness Doctrine, and I basically agreed with them on that point. Forcing private broadcasters to act like they were neutral on every issue was problematic. But now apparently that's flipped and free speech means forcing a private company not to take sides on any issue, even when taking a side doesn't require censoring or restricting anyone else's speech.

Any Republican that was genuinely anti-censorship would be cheering Twitter's move, even if they disagreed with the content of this particular fact-check.

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#225
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol what, he is biased for pointing out misinformation from a prominent public figure, after years of Twitter being criticised for allowing false information to proliferate?

I think he is referencing those tweets: https://twitter.com/LevineJonathan/status/126545757821512499...

Wow! I would say, unless Twitter has double standards, it should fact-check the tweets of its own "head of integrity".

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? Forbid all of it? Forbid what, exactly - any app that allows communication between more than 1 person? Even if Twitter were to go bankrupt tomorrow, something else would come to replace it.

Social media can only survive because of safe harbor provisions. If sites become responsible for the content they host, social media as we know would instantly die out.

You are not forced to follow or interact poeple you disagree with.

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#227
How can the "private platform so they can do whatever they want" crowd reconcile their views on election interference using social media in 2016 with this latest move by Twitter? If they can do what they want with their platform why did it matter in 2016 and why does it not matter now?

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? Forbid all of it? Forbid what, exactly - any app that allows communication between more than 1 person? Even if Twitter were to go bankrupt tomorrow, something else would come to replace it.

Social media can only survive because of safe harbor provisions. If sites become responsible for the content they host, social media as we know would instantly die out.

So would a vast number of things. github, blogs, cloud, public web hosting of almost any kind.

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#229
post #100
post #72

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.

Aye but with no one in charge, how can the masses protect themselves against ever-increasing disinformation campaigns?

If there is control over information, how do the masses protect themselves against disinformation campaigns coming from official sources?

Conspiracy theories and baseless nonsense is the price you pay to be able to criticize those in power. It is a price worth paying.

Re: Trump threatens to 'close' down social media platforms

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out, people with important jobs that require impartiality (like judges) have real, personal, opinions and feelings.

He dismissed the entire Midwest as lunatics to be ignored. There’s a lot of hackers and engineers and amazing companies in the Midwest. He’s mindless in his opinions. He’s not against a policy or a politician. He’s separating society.

I'm from the midwest. I usually get fucking pissed when people call them flyover states, caused major friction with a cofounder for years.

But seeing this mislabeled as "bias" has got to be the silliest and most hyperbolic over-reaction I've ever seen.

It's somebody being a minor asshole on Twitter. That is not bias of any substantial sort.

Feelings are important, but as somebody who does get his (overly sensitive) feelings hurt by that statement, I'm at least mature enough to place it in context.

We need to grow up as a society. There are faaaaaar worse actual biases on display everyday on Twitter, from people with far more power. We have a president who's threatening to use his own political bias to shut down or regulate companies based only in what he perceives as politics.

Post reply on HN