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

Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

taibbi.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 596 posts

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#251

Post by kodah »

striking wrote: post #232
kodah wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the part where this thread was flagged by HackerNews earlier.

If it was flagged, and then became unflagged, it may have been flagged by the users of HN and then may have been unflagged by mods. Is it then mods enhancing the freedom of expression by unflagging something, or censoring the community self-moderation? You decide!

Personally I look at it as a barometer for where peoples sentiments fall on a linear path. Who is doing moderation vs censorship has little consequence if you acknowledge that the entire system is distributed and the outcomes are the same.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#252

Post by RhysU »

hackyhacky wrote: post #211
mrfusion wrote: post #191

> Both the government and private companies can censor stuff. But private companies are a little bit scarier. They have no constitution to answer to. They’re not elected. They have no constituents or voters. All of the protections we’ve built up to protect against government tyranny don’t exist for corporate tyranny. - Aaron Swartz

I respect Swartz a lot, and he makes many good points. But let's not pretend that Twitter and Facebook hold information monopolies with equivalent power to the government's ability to censor. As proof, consider that we are having this conversation right now, about an article that was published and is freely, legally available online to anyone with a web browser. You can disagree with Twitter's editorial choices, but…

> But let's not pretend that Twitter and Facebook hold information monopolies with equivalent power to the government's ability to censor.

Those private entities can censor in excess of the government. They are scarier.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#253

Post by ketamine__ »

googthrowaway42 wrote: post #242
r00tanon wrote: post #200

Drivel. No sensible person believes blocking QAnon nonsense is a "scandal." For many reasons, not the least being that it is also the very definition of "unsubstantiated" as is this Hunter Biden story. Applying editorial standards (finally) to some of the more outrageous content posted on social media platforms is no more controversial than that of print media's choice to do so. The term "social media" is a complete…

> Drivel. No sensible person believes blocking QAnon nonsense is a "scandal. The fact that you conflate QAnon with this story indicates an extremely myopic and unrefined understanding of the world. This story was first published by the NY Post, not by someone on 8chan. These are completely unconnected things in terms of which communities are the source of this story.

Let's not pretend that stealing a laptop and publishing its content is journalism that is worthy of protection. Yes, it is illegal and unlike baseless conspiracy theories this is a crime that should be prosecuted.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#254

Post by jsu32 »

hackyhacky wrote: post #151
haltingproblem wrote: post #2

I fear Taibbi is right, the suppression by Twitter, irrespective of the merits and veracity of NY Post's report, will now normalize all kinds of behavior by platforms of all kinds big and small. Which will then incentivize governments to take on the platforms. This also raises issues of unequal treatment - say the NY Post report was factually wrong - why pick on the NY Post only? Why not the hundreds of other "news o…

They're not suppressing the article because it's wrong, but because it's pretty obviously intentionally planted misinformation disguised as news. Twitter has a choice: either they can suppress it; or they can be pawns of whatever bad actors are creating this disinformation. It's a hard choice, and clearly it's a struggle that as a society we have to deal with. Right now, creating and distributing disinformation is ea…

It was really fun to watch half (liberal) Twitter claiming this was disinformation (i.e. false information) and the other half - including Twitter itself - claiming it was hacking (i.e. absolutely true information, albeit one they shouldn't have their hands on).

I feel most people don't care about the facts, they care about their opinions which is now part of their identity. This is not good at all.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#255

Post by galaxyLogic »

If Twitter must publish all posts then doesn't it mean that New York Post must also publish all the letters that are sent to its "From the Readers" -page (assuming there is such)?

Twitter is like a newspaper whose content comes only from its readers. It does not mean it has to publish everything.

It does have a moral prerogative to not spread misinformation. Misinformation hurts the public. Twitter must make the decision about what it thinks is misinformation and should not be publish it.

This has nothing to do with censorship. Because Fox News does not cover certain stories we are not accusing it of censorship. Free Press means the press is free to publish or not.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#256

Post by [deleted] »

hackyhacky wrote: post #211
mrfusion wrote: post #191

> Both the government and private companies can censor stuff. But private companies are a little bit scarier. They have no constitution to answer to. They’re not elected. They have no constituents or voters. All of the protections we’ve built up to protect against government tyranny don’t exist for corporate tyranny. - Aaron Swartz

I respect Swartz a lot, and he makes many good points. But let's not pretend that Twitter and Facebook hold information monopolies with equivalent power to the government's ability to censor. As proof, consider that we are having this conversation right now, about an article that was published and is freely, legally available online to anyone with a web browser. You can disagree with Twitter's editorial choices, but…

[deleted]

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#257

Post by mjfl »

ketamine__ wrote: post #253
googthrowaway42 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Drivel. No sensible person believes blocking QAnon nonsense is a "scandal. The fact that you conflate QAnon with this story indicates an extremely myopic and unrefined understanding of the world. This story was first published by the NY Post, not by someone on 8chan. These are completely unconnected things in terms of which communities are the source of this story.

Let's not pretend that stealing a laptop and publishing its content is journalism that is worthy of protection. Yes, it is illegal and unlike baseless conspiracy theories this is a crime that should be prosecuted.

unlike stealing tax returns?!? or wikileaks?!?! which US courts said was treason?!

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#258

Post by ethanwillis »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #90
missedthecue wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should T Mobile or Verizon be able to censor your phone calls and text messages if they don't like the content? After all, they're private companies as well.

The difference is that social media aren't neutral communication channels when the visibility of a communication is altered by likes and algorithms.

DMs don't have their visibility modulated in the same way as the main feed.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#259

Post by [deleted] »

missedthecue wrote: post #33
tracer4201 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The liberal wing was upset that state and non state actors influenced the 2016 election by manipulating social media. Now, Twitter is working to suppress some content that they believe is a repeat attempt — the October surprise if you will. I don’t have strong opinions on whether it’s right or wrong, but I don’t think this is a scandal. Twitter is a private company. You don’t have a constitutional right to write what…

Should T Mobile or Verizon be able to censor your phone calls and text messages if they don't like the content? After all, they're private companies as well.

[deleted]

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#260

Post by stonogo »

RhysU wrote: post #252
hackyhacky wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I respect Swartz a lot, and he makes many good points. But let's not pretend that Twitter and Facebook hold information monopolies with equivalent power to the government's ability to censor. As proof, consider that we are having this conversation right now, about an article that was published and is freely, legally available online to anyone with a web browser. You can disagree with Twitter's editorial choices, but…

> But let's not pretend that Twitter and Facebook hold information monopolies with equivalent power to the government's ability to censor. Those private entities can censor in excess of the government. They are scarier.

Get back to me when Twitter has the power to round up everyone who read a given story and have them executed in the street, because that's what government censorship can look like. It's not limited to some partisan nerd toggling a flag in a database somewhere. I think you should probably take this opportunity to re-evaluate the relative powers of these entities.
Post reply on HN