Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#571

Post by iaw » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:24 AM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #557

iaw wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The media never reported on any of his scandals because he never had any scandals because the media never reported on his scandals because....

Fast & Furious was a scandal (albeit a small one). There's a couple of other posters that outline things that should have been scandals but it's not that the media never reported it, it's that the public didn't get outraged.

Not enough people cared about the extra-judicial assassination of a US citizen because he was probably a terrorist so it only lasted one news cycle, that could have been a scandal but it was not. If people don't care about the behavior as being wrong then the event won't be a scandal.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#572

Post by jeremyjh » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:26 AM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #566

jeremyjh wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree they blundered here. They don't want to be hijacked by another "leaks" story days before the election but now the suppression of this has become the entire story, and its convinced a lot of people the story is true and dangerous to Biden. Even if the email is true I don't see how its dangerous and if the only media carrying the story are the NY Post and Fox it doesn't hurt Biden.

Not sure why you are getting downvoted. Classic Barbara Streisand effect

Maybe because I suggested Facebook and Twitter are concerned with the news hurting Biden. A better way to phrase would be - "is the story consequential to the election". I think it was not until they took this action, and it is a very strange hill to die on.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#573

Post by cm2187 » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:27 AM UTC

laverya wrote: post #540

iaw wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 is the only president in recent memory not actively involved in some scandalous behavior. Uhhhhh... Not involved in scandalous behavior that you knew of , perhaps. Fast&Furious [0] would have been a major scandal in a Republican administration (despite the fact that it was started by a previous president), and the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki [1] was a massive step in the erosion of civil liberties in the US. T…

Or using the IRS to target conservative organisations. Or spying on journalists to identify leakers. Plus the attempts to further destabilise the middle east and its disastrous effects.

Plus the russian collusion investigation, which is highly problematic (spying on your political opponents in the middle of an election campaign, based on some implausible allegations).

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#574

Post by moneybadger » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:28 AM UTC

pensatoio wrote: post #459

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.

I see ridiculous (even virulent) hot takes blasted out by overwhelmingly left-leaning major media orgs with near zero consequences on twitter and facebook. Half the time, this stuff proves to be incomplete - borderline maliciously so - or even factually incorrect, within days. I'm still hearing daily from people who think Breonna Taylor was shot in her sleep. Regardless of how you lean politically, this behavior shou…

Except the Washington Post isn't releasing possibly faked or hacked emails about Breonna Taylor being shot in her sleep three weeks before an election in a blatant attempt to manufacture an October Surprise. Don't try and create false equivalency here.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#575

Post by 0xy » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:28 AM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #549

0xy wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 po…

You're assuming they have the emails in the raw form. It's possible they just have PDFs and not the full content. You're also assuming Fox and NY Post have journalists on staff who know what DKIM is, let alone how to verify it's genuine. They're journalists, not CompSci majors.

The "drip drip" is an intentional strategy, of course. This smells like a setup to me. They leak the lukewarm email, get a denial from Biden, then leak a smoking gun that cannot be denied (speculation).

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#576

Post by rectang » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:29 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #288

likeafox wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I question if the National Review is really the best home for this story.

I also felt more comfortable with yahoo.com than with a politicized site like NR. The intention here is simply to be accurate and neutral to the extent possible. But it's the same article, so it doesn't make sense to pretend that it comes from a different source, besides which the HN guidelines say " Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter. " ( https:…

I understand the moderation decisions made today, but I'm alienated by them.

A political article like this one would ordinarily get flagged off the HN front page. The subject matter of Twitter and Facebook imposing constraints on distribution is germane, but this article goes way beyond that by propagating the suspect email content.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#577

Post by Amezarak » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:30 AM UTC

petee wrote: post #503

Amezarak wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalists write and publish (or sometimes don’t) articles in collaboration with campaigns and other "interested" parties with an agenda all the time, and rarely mention it or make it obvious. If anything, that’s the norm. So what's different about this than those stories?

Because a sitting president has a personal influence and stake in the articles creation and publication, used as a tool to undermine an opposition candidate. Its plain obvious election interference, and the repercussions are staggering, thats the difference.

That is not on the slightest bit strange or unusual. It’s what every President, campaigning nominee, and various administration official have been doing with the press for centuries. Indeed if anything, this President and his campaign have been at this rather less than usual, probably because of his extremely adversarial attitude toward the press.

I’m really astonished at the reaction to it.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#578

Post by dahfizz » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:30 AM UTC

ehsankia wrote: post #553

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.

Can someone explain why it even matters. I know HN isn't for politics but I don't understand why having dinner with your son's work friend is that big of a deal. Trump, who is the President (not VP), meets regularly with all sorts of people who spend money at his resort and other businesses and no one cares about that.

> Trump, who is the President (not VP), meets regularly with all sorts of people who spend money at his resort and other businesses and no one cares about that.

I hear people (rightly) complain about this all the time.

> Can someone explain why it even matters.

I think it matters because Joe has denied any participation at all with his sons business dealings. The emails explicitly mention using influence, buying time with the VP, etc. If the emails are real, they would prove joe a liar.

You could say "but Trump is a liar" and you'd be right. You'd also be openly admitting that Joe is no better.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#579

Post by beaner » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:31 AM UTC

bosswipe wrote: post #476

jimmydorry wrote: post #411

Absolutely agree, but I don't think this is the tipping point yet. An important line was crossed, but it will probably take a bit more before there is enough political capital to do something. On the other hand, if the party benefiting from this move gets into power, that might be enough to stop any change from happening.

What happens if the party that is attacking our democracy by spreading disinformation in the last few weeks of the election gets into power?

Ask Twitter, they're participating in disinformation by falsely claiming - without evidence - that these emails were hacked.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#580

Post by sk2020 » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:32 AM UTC

rmrfstar wrote: post #13

Robert Graham [1] pointed out that if the emails are authentic, they can be trivially verified via DKIM. That the email metadata was not released implies the emails are either inauthentic, or that the post did not contact someone with basic competence in computer forensics. Either possibility seriously undercuts the article's credibility. [1] https://twitter.com/ErrataRob/status/1316407424648179717

I would think the financial risk for libel would be serious if it were true that the emails are fabrications and so made with intent to harm. Similarly, I would expect attorneys or all involved would be aware of this and were not sufficiently concerned.