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

Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#141

Post by mellosouls »

zalkota wrote: post #106

Here's a list of various hoaxes/leaks/etc. that the big tech social media companies allowed and did not censor, even though they took action in this instance: https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/15/11-hacks-leaks-and-hoax ... This list seems like strong proof that the we cannot trust these social media companies to be neutral actors. They shouldn't be given controlling power to the digital public square.

While I agree that the liberal-run tech firms are biased against conservative news sources, I think it is only fair to point out that the list you link is compiled and presented by a conservative organisation that has apparently been under criticism for its own approach to covid reporting (see the wiki page; and yes, I think wikipedia seems often liberal-biased), and can not be considered a neutral voice in this particular discussion.

That doesn't mean the list isn't valid; but it can't be assumed it is balanced.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#142

Post by triceratops »

verroq wrote: post #125
lanstin wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who thinks any corporation is a neutral actor? And did the government make Twitter popular? The people that use Twitter granted that power as is their right. The people are free to setup decentralized publication systems if that is better. Twitter doesn’t really owe you an explanation of the different standard they use at different times.

Ah but Twitter claims to be a neutral actor [0]. How dare we uphold it to its own standards. [0]. For the purposes of section 230

For the 500 millionth time, section 230 says absolutely nothing about impartiality. And about moderation all it says is "Do as much as you like, even more than the government requires. You won't be liable."

Seriously, actually go read section 230 instead of relying on Internet commenters to tell you what it is.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#143

Post by spikels »

rayiner wrote: post #89
dkackman11 wrote: post #48

Maybe getting rid of professional journalism, and crowd sourcing the news via secret algorithms, isn't such a great idea after all...

The “professional journalists” aren’t that great either. The field has been overtaken by 20 year olds. Even Matt Yglesias, who has spent most of his career to the left of Democrats as a whole, has been grumbling on his podcast about journalists these days failing to respect the difference between journalism and advocacy. Matt Taibbi (who I don’t like as a person but who is at least a real journalist) has written an e…

The change in journalism is one of the most important developments in recent decades. While always a business the economic incentives have completely changed and thus the product has been reshaped to best profit from the new environment. Things like accuracy and objectivity are now counterproductive both increasing costs and losing revenue.

Taibbi’s book does a good job of explaining these changes but the situation is still evolving and the definitive analysis has yet to be written. Much like the news today the story has to be pieced together from multiple sources with varying biases including outright misinformation.

I’m starting to think that this is the actual “normal” information situation. It’s everyone’s responsibility to determine the truth for themselves by comparing multiple sources, getting primary information and thinking hard about what’s going on.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#144

Post by jonnycomputer »

taxicab wrote: post #23

The story reeks from top to bottom. The owner of the repair shop that allegedly received the laptop from Biden is a super far right conspiracy theorist. To the point where he literally believes that the Clintons are out to kill him for the information he has [1]. The whole story is that this is Hunter Biden's laptop, but in reality some random dude dropped it off and the owner said that "he had a medical condition th…

1. That the FBI subpoenaed the laptop is sort of interesting. That usually requires a grand jury, doesn't it? But this is really weird:

>During the subsequent summer and fall, Mac Isaac said he became alarmed after browsing through the computer's files. He claims he then spoke with an associate more versed than him in the law and in current events.

>That unnamed person then contacted the FBI, Mac Isaac said.

>Federal investigators from Wilmington and Baltimore then subpoenaed the laptop in December, Mac Isaac said.

>Shortly after, they called Mac Isaac asking him to assist them, technically, in viewing the files on the damaged hard drive, he said.

>Mac Isaac admitted that the request raised his own suspicion, given that the FBI has its own technical staff.

2. This doesn't seem like the kind of thing a reputable shop would be doing with someone's property (poking around inside, sending it to Giuliani). Could it have violated the law?

3. The stories tell what we already knew: Hunter tried to cash in on his dad, while living the loser life of an addict. Won't change my vote.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#145

Post by lanstin »

verroq wrote: post #125
lanstin wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who thinks any corporation is a neutral actor? And did the government make Twitter popular? The people that use Twitter granted that power as is their right. The people are free to setup decentralized publication systems if that is better. Twitter doesn’t really owe you an explanation of the different standard they use at different times.

Ah but Twitter claims to be a neutral actor [0]. How dare we uphold it to its own standards. [0]. For the purposes of section 230

you can be neutral about this political party or that party and still seeks to encourage truth and goodness and discourage lies and badness, as you see it.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#146

Post by gok »

It's frustrating Twitter and Facebook won't just say the truth:

"This is a blatant attempt at disinformation by politicians who have repeatedly attacked our employees, and we don't want it. It's our web site, stop trying to tell us what our own rules are. Go spread your nonsense somewhere else.

If you think this is a 230 violation sue us."

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#147

Post by pcmoney »

I don't understand why this is so controversial.

You cannot reveal personal details of someone on Twitter (email, phone number etc.) The article contained unreacted personal info so should be blocked.

You also cannot link directly to hacked/obtained without consent material on twitter. The article contained screenshot of the material so should be blocked.

You CAN link to material that discusses hacked/obtained without consent material on Twitter as long as it does not contain the material. eg. Trump Tax Return story by NYT.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#148

Post by tzs »

verroq wrote: post #125
lanstin wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who thinks any corporation is a neutral actor? And did the government make Twitter popular? The people that use Twitter granted that power as is their right. The people are free to setup decentralized publication systems if that is better. Twitter doesn’t really owe you an explanation of the different standard they use at different times.

Ah but Twitter claims to be a neutral actor [0]. How dare we uphold it to its own standards. [0]. For the purposes of section 230

Section 230 has nothing to do with neutrality. Indeed, the whole point of 230 is to make it easier for sites that host user content to not be neutral.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#150

Post by lanstin »

koolba wrote: post #133
lanstin wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who thinks any corporation is a neutral actor? And did the government make Twitter popular? The people that use Twitter granted that power as is their right. The people are free to setup decentralized publication systems if that is better. Twitter doesn’t really owe you an explanation of the different standard they use at different times.

I don’t expect people who are lobbying on behalf of a candidate to be unbiased. They’re clearly not and they admit it. But if an org is going to fly the flag of neutrality then they’ll get called out for crap like this.

Politically neutral but not neutral on truth or virtue. Also why don’t more of the people not agreeing with Twitter’s use of power push for more decentralized networks?
Post reply on HN