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

971–980 of 1001 posts

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

#971

Post by [deleted] »

belorn wrote: post #490
sailingparrot wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New technologies brought new challenges. There was no social network in the 2000s and before. No retweet button, no "curated" timeline that showed you what you "like". YouTube did not try to push more videos like the ones you watched previously until the mid 2010s. Free speech does not have the same meaning as before. Before it just meant that you could say whatever you wanted. Now people use it implicitly to mean th…

When radio came the first few decades were great, but soon more and more people started to broadcast and corrupting music started to harm society. People demanded that government and only government could artfully decide whom aught to be allowed to speak to the masses and censors cracked down on unlicensed radio. Several decades later however and the enthusiasm for radio censoring lost it appeal. When television came…

[deleted]

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

#972

Post by drew-y »

ibejoeb wrote: post #915
drew-y wrote: post #777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> BLM Riots This is a harmful characterization of an important movement. No protests on that scale are going to go without a hitch. That shouldn't minimize their importance. > Researchers at the US Crisis Monitor analyzed over 10,600 nationwide protests between May 24 (the day before George Floyd was killed by police) and Aug. 22, and found that nearly 95 percent were peaceful [1] Jacob Blake was shot seven times in…

>He was unarmed He was armed, and he admitted to it, and it is documented in the DOJ statement.

Can you provide a source for this? The best I can find is that he had a knife on the floor of the truck. But was otherwise unarmed. This is consistent across all the main sources I've checked.

1. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/08/28/fac... 2. https://en.as.com/en/2020/08/25/latest_news/1598382234_23093... 3. https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/local/2020/08/26/jacob-b...

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

#973

Post by drew-y »

shatnersbassoon wrote: post #925
drew-y wrote: post #777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> BLM Riots This is a harmful characterization of an important movement. No protests on that scale are going to go without a hitch. That shouldn't minimize their importance. > Researchers at the US Crisis Monitor analyzed over 10,600 nationwide protests between May 24 (the day before George Floyd was killed by police) and Aug. 22, and found that nearly 95 percent were peaceful [1] Jacob Blake was shot seven times in…

> Researchers at the US Crisis Monitor analyzed over 10,600 nationwide protests between May 24 (the day before George Floyd was killed by police) and Aug. 22, and found that nearly 95 percent were peaceful [1] so >500 riots then?

No.

> When destructive protests by demonstrators did take place, the "victims" were often statues of slave owners, Confederate leaders, and colonial figures.

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

#974

Post by giardini »

donmcronald wrote: post #867
giardini wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ffggvv says >"so many stories about trump are later proven to be fake or unsubstantiated such as the russian bounties, that he owes money to russia, the steele dossier etc... and his tax returns were also stolen or hacked" By now you should understand the Democratic Party's news cycle: a) Make up a message (something, anything bad) and present it to the press as a Presidential abomination, b) Get Democratically-favor…

So where are you finding out the truth about all this stuff? I'd love to have an unbiased news source to rely on.

You say in another post you're not American. What is your investment in the situation?

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

#975

Post by tomhoward »

deanCommie wrote: post #149

[flagged]

People on HN have been up in arms about all those topics since they appeared. Maybe it was that the discussions got so inflammatory and repetitive they ended up getting flamed/flagged off the front page before you saw them. But if you do a few searches (in the box at the bottom of each page) like I just did, you'll find plenty.

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

#976

Post by xg15 »

Karunamon wrote: post #892
xg15 wrote: post #873

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you consider the Snowden leaks the result of "hacking" but the current leaks not, what exactly is your definition of "hacking"?

I for one, would specifically exclude the legal owner of a set of data from copying that data and giving it to a third party from the definition of "hacking".

Agreed, assuming there is informed consent - meaning the legal owner was aware of what was happening, was intending to provide the data and was not deceived.

Without those conditions, you'd exclude the whole field of social engineering from hacking, which is all about making the owner "voluntarily" copy data to a third party - and is widely regarded a subset of "hacking".

Also pending the specific circumstances under which you "own" data, which may not be identical with owning the storage medium, as discussed in other posts.

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

#977

Post by JerryHolmby »

Please explain Twitter's view on the following:

I don't care about what is in the article. The NYPost is the #3 newspaper in the US. This story is not from Guccifer 2.0. If NYPost publishes something, it is shareable. It is not up to Twitter to "re-edit" major news sources. If they start doing that, they are a "publisher" and no longer a "platform."

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

#978

Post by lobotryas »

mhh__ wrote: post #560
partiallypro wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter's "rules" would have stopped huge stories like The Pentagon Papers, Panama Papers, Watergate, etc from being posted on their platform. The statement read like it was typed up by an intern that didn't communicate with the legal team or any logical person. (edited for clarification)

Why? Watergate was largely built off journalistic work not hacked materials, obviously deep throat was inside the FBI but he was never quoted

I don’t use Twitter, so please remind me: did the site allow linking to articles or documents that Snowden stole[0]? And isn’t a hack just theft by other means? If Twitter benevolently censored linking to those docs then at least we have consistency.

[0] - Yes, it’s more involved than “stealing” because Snowden acted as a whistleblower, but I’m trying to draw a comparison.

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

#979

Post by _wwz4 »

joe_the_user wrote: post #653
crusso wrote: post #650

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're in a power transition where the Left is now in control of major societal levers: Academia, Hollywood, sports entertainment, the mainstream news media, large government bureaucracies, and big tech. Once the loudest champions of free speech because they were trying to break down the old power structures, the Left is now consolidating its power and sees no need to allow upstarts to criticize the new order.

To call this "the left" is ridiculous. What you're talking about is the "multicultural mainstream", the neoliberal center. Essentially, it's the ideology of those major corporation that want to ban all sexist and racist discourse because this sort of thing makes it harder for teams of people scattered about the world to work together. It's an ideology that's still OK with tremendous wealth disparities but which want…

My POV is from American politics where the left is in lockstep with the censorship going on at Google, Facebook, and Twitter. This very story is about how Joe Biden is being protected by those tech giants. Those tech giants also are the ones protecting leftist movements like Antifa and the Democratic Socialists of America.

Maybe there's a part of the left outside of the USA that still stands up for free speech? Not here in the USA. That game is over. Except for a few voices in the wilderness like Brett Weinstein and Sam Harris, the left is comprised of those whose interests and actions now align with the tech giants.

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

#980

Post by manigandham »

SECProto wrote: post #533
mattchew wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A little older than you, but same basic experience. I also don't understand how the tide turned so swiftly against freedom of speech, and in favor of authorities deciding what people should be allowed to hear or read. But it did turn, and I don't see the trend reversing. While I don't like the prospect of an increasingly censored society, it will be interesting to watch the struggle between the big platform censors a…

> I also don't understand how the tide turned so swiftly against freedom of speech, and in favor of authorities deciding what people should be allowed to hear or read. Freedom of speech meant freedom from /government/ control of speech. It has never meant freedom from the any impact. This article (facebook et al blocking/removing/deplatforming) is functionally no different than a newspaper choosing what to publish in…

Social networks are specifically not publishers. They do not have editorial control over the content of their users.
Post reply on HN