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

Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

nationalreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#541

Post by jdminhbg »

nautilus12 wrote: post #329
taxicab wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that, but IMO context matters here. We are 20 days away from the election. People are standing in lines to vote as we speak. If this was published at any other time (and the material for the story has apparently existed since December) the public and the professional media would have had time to scrutinize it, discuss its shortcomings, etc. But, as Winston Churchill said "A lie gets halfway around the world…

Funny how the same logic doesn't apply to the steele dossier :/

Love the downvotes for this. Anyone who thinks for a second that Twitter and FB have some kind of set of principles that this story and only this story have crossed is deluded.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#542

Post by srtjstjsj »

reilly3000 wrote: post #279
patrickaljord wrote: post #269

Here's the article for those wondering https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden...

This is a colossal failure of a scam to discredit Biden. There was no chain of custody, the proported email had tons of tell tale signs of being faked, and NYPost posted exif data that undermined their whole claim. They even used ints for ids allowing a lot of unpublished docs out. https://twitter.com/russelneiss/status/1316398928850452481 https://twitter.com/russelneiss/status/1316402052885606400 https://twitter.com…

One of those tweets has has reply debunking it.

The other makes a specious claim about implied claims of timestamps that no one made.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#544

Post by ehsankia »

dimitrios1 wrote: post #327
taxicab wrote: post #90

To be fair, the fact that it was published by the New York Post already seriously undercuts the article's credibility. Edit: and also the fact that it was written in collaboration with the President's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

Yet I don't recall anyone questioning Buzzfeed News when they dropped their bombshell story years back. I remember the defenders saying something along the lines of "If the news is newsworthy and constitutes journalism, then the publication it was produced in shouldn't matter" As HN audience mostly claim to be full of "independent thinkers" we should have no problem with this being published by the Post if it indeed…

I'm not sure what you're implying, Buzzfeed News is independent from Buzzfeed (the clickbait site) and they do real journalism.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#545

Post by iaw »

0xy wrote: post #531
iaw wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is one source of information, Rudy Giuliani. Someone with known ties to Russian intelligence claiming that his lawyer received a surprise hard drive from a computer repairman who has an utterly implausible explanation for his acquisition of said drive. Someone who has been known to spread false allegations and conspiracy theories including the claim that Joe Biden is suffering from dementia. The Biden campaign…

Most news articles based on leaks are uncorroborated allegations. Even if the source was Putin himself, shouldn't the question be "are the emails authentic" rather than "who leaked the emails"? Wikileaks has had questionable sources in the past, but they've generally been authentic leaks (for example the DNC email leaks had authentic and signed email headers). I'm not saying the emails are authentic, I'm saying the q…

My primary concern is about whether the information I'm looking at is factual or not.

If Russia had proof of corruption on the candidate they did not excessively favor then I would be interested. When historic propagandists have "proof" I need corroboration otherwise I'm being controlled by the propaganda as it was intended.

Remember Benghazi? How confident everyone was, for years? Nothing came from it because nothing was there. The people that were talking about Benghazi were only people that benefited from it politically. Remember Al Franken? Remember when people that didn't benefit from it politically agreed he should step down after his behavior?

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#547

Post by esoterica »

Tycho wrote: post #361

Crux of the issue is that everyone knows there’s a double standard. Why do they co-ordinate to block this story and not the countless other “unverified” scoops? Because it threatens a protected politician.

They are a private company and are under no obligation to be fair or unbiased, the same way the NY Post has no obligation (and isn't) fair or unbiased.

Given that the administration has no qualms about using the DOJ to persecute tech companies in a politically motivated manner, I see no reason why Twitter and Facebook can't play dirty and fight back using underhanded means.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#548

Post by rndgermandude »

iaw wrote: post #509
alehul wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buzzfeed has been deemed left, which is a category beyond left-leaning, by an objective fact-checker [1]. As one example of why: > In June 2016, the left-leaning media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting found that in 100 BuzzFeed stories about Barack Obama, 65 were positive, 34 were neutral, and one was critical. [1] https://www.allsides.com/news-source/buzzfeed-media-bias

I don't think having more positive stories about a Democratic president makes a publication left-leaning, especially given that Obama is the only president in recent memory not actively involved in some scandalous behavior. This is coming from someone who did not agree with most of Obama's policy decisions but at least could respect his integrity.

Obama had his share of scandals (and I am not saying that to downplay the clusterfuck that is the Trump admin; Obama's pale in comparison, but they are still there), like IRS targeting of right wing orgs, Operation Fast and Furious, drone-ing (of US citizens), all the Snowden revelations, and "Obama's war on whistleblowers" (as The Guardian called it), for example.

Or other things like the "De-Ba'athification" policy in Iraq which most likely played a major role in the empowerment of ISIS (not really a scandal, more of a failed policy, but yet something that can be criticized).

Point being, there was a lot of things to rightfully criticize about the Obama admin, and therefore Obama himself ("the buck stops here").

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#549

Post by Karunamon »

0xy wrote: post #534
bosswipe wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe the source because they're known liars. I definitely don't believe the story that a laptop with Ukrainian emails was left in a DC repair shop and then given to Trump's personal propagandist lawyer Rudy Guliani. Also they're not publishing the emails headers as explained here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24780927

Even if Guliani got the source from Russian intelligence, that does not mean the emails are automatically not authentic. Does it mean the Russians are interfering? Probably. Does it mean their evidence of corruption is void? Not really. If this is the Russians (unproven speculation on your part), it does not mean the emails are not authentic.

Two organizations have these supposed emails, Fox and NYPost. They could mathematically prove their legitimacy by simply posting the entire raw messages, with headers. DKIM was active at the time these messages were supposedly sent, so if the signatures match up, authenticity is confirmed.

The fact that this hasn't been done is concerning, unless it's being sat on for future impact.. the "drip drip drip" method of political bombshell news isn't a new tactic. If we're still here in a week with nothing other than screenshots, we can probably write the messages off as frauds. I'm withholding my judgement for a few days.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#550

Post by nullc »

hirundo wrote: post #54

There's a recurring argument on social media censorship that goes: "you wouldn't want the telephone company censoring phone conversations would you?" And the response is along the lines: "these are hardly private conversations, any tweet can go viral and be seen by millions". This story breaks that mold in that it involves social media censoring private conversations via DM. If you think that's OK for Twitter on its…

> This story breaks that mold in that it involves social media censoring private conversations via DM.

This isn't a new behaviour.

I've experienced it personally: Back in 2011, when I published the big archive of paywalled but copyright expired Jstor documents with attached manifesto facebook silently vanished any message containing a link to it or the title of it, even in private messages.

One reason you haven't heard more about this behaviour is because the fact of the matter is that its extremely effective.

Post reply on HN