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

Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

melovedata.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 763 posts

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#311

Post by [deleted] »

zonzobonzo wrote: post #288
dsaavy wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP here, the statement mentioning Breitbart alongside the NYT isn't meant to make them equivalent. It's meant to point out that I follow media outlets with major influence for their respective audience. Breitbart is unfortunately a favorite for Republican audiences alongside Fox News, which is why they're mentioned. It's important to track media outlets that have large influence over Democrat and Republican audiences…

true brietbart and fox are influential over their readers, bu t they cannot be compared to responsible publishers in respect to their commitment to the truth, and therefore do not deserve respect of those of us who are committed to the truth.

[deleted]

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#312

Post by rangoon626 »

vmception wrote: post #17
r00fus wrote: post #2

Twitter is a private corporation and perhaps its best if we all realize that FB/Twitter/Google are biased agencies. That said, maybe it's best if NYPost stays off Twitter.

I don't understand how people want to ignore that being pro-"free speech" means private sector corporations can choose which speech they want to associate with too just like an individual can. You have the right to say whatever you want, everyone else has the right to not allow it on their property. There is no first amendment right to compelled listening. We aren't remotely close to having that. There isn't even a s…

Yeah, well “their property” happens to rely on A LOT of public infrastructure.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#313

Post by zonzobonzo »

free_rms wrote: post #262
javagram wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlikely. Remember, there were 10 separate investigations into Benghazi, for instance, and Twitter didn’t block any of them from being posted. No reason to suppose they will act differently for Biden. Their action here seems to be more out of fear of a pre-election bombshell similar to the 2016 “emails” that turned out to a nothingburger.

That was then, this is now. They are acting differently for Biden. Twitter's setting themselves up as the arbiter of what constitutes "properly sourced" information. What happens if there's another Snowden-type leak under Biden? Hacked materials, gathered without consent, potentially slanderous, definitely hurting the 'good guys' in this news cycle...

they aren't acting differently for Biden. They are acting responsibly to the American public. Do you support the destruction of truth free_rms?

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#314

Post by MuffinFlavored »

tomcam wrote: post #169

Those of you who think locking the account was a good idea should remember you won’t always be in the majority.

If you had to put it into numbers, how would you say the user base of HackerNews breaks down in terms of right-leaning versus left-leaning? I think that's where it all stems from.

If you lean right, you don't want to see this level of censorship.

If you don't, you're fine with it because it's pretty much exclusively in the direction of Trump.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#315

Post by throwawaygh »

keiferski wrote: post #118

Honestly, I see this kind of action as good. The sooner the population at large realizes that Big Social aren't neutral players in the marketplace of ideas, the better. We need decentralized solutions, ASAP, and the only way that's going to happen is when normal people start caring.

> We need decentralized solutions

TBH maybe we just need to move on from social media instead.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#316

Post by maxerickson »

ggreer wrote: post #256
raunakdag wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting that @ap is considered a leftward slant. I’m not sure if you’d consider Reuters the same at that point?

They're less biased than most sources, but there are little things that are easy to notice. The Associated Press in 2015: "BREAKING: Obama sends $4 trillion spending plan to Congress, pledging help for middle class."[1] The Associated Press in 2018: "BREAKING: President Trump sends Congress $4.4 trillion spending plan that features soaring deficits."[2] If a news organization put "soaring deficits" in the Obama headl…

Obama, proposing $2 trillion in new taxes, ~$500 billion in annual deficits going forward:

https://apnews.com/article/97f7a140f39a43d0995587be61ed388f

Trump proposing tax cuts and ~$1 trillion in annual deficits going forward:

https://apnews.com/article/e50aec4820da4e30aed4bea9ff440e86

The plans differ considerably in substance, your comparison speciously treats them as similar or the same.

And even more, Obama sent a wishlist to a hostile Congress. Trump got more of what he wanted.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#317

Post by TigeriusKirk »

dragonwriter wrote: post #167
olivermarks wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yikes - I've found Zerohedge to be scarily accurate over time! Depends on your political allegiances I suppose but my mother taught me when i was kid to always read the financial press - 'follow the money to find out what the b@stards are thinking' was her old line. (she used to work for the UK tory party in the '50's, despised them). ZH is what many city of London and wall street minions read live on their bloomberg…

> Separately I view Twitter as breaking section 230 free speech regulatory agreements in meddling with what they 'publish' Section 230 was overtly adopted so that platforms would make efforts to censor content that they found to be objectionable; there are no "free speech regulatory agreements" associated with it. It is the only surviving part of a law whose sole and entire purpose was internet censorship, the rest o…

When people say "violating section 230," rather than correcting them it's more instructive to understand what they're trying to communicate.

Usually it seems to be they're really saying "this shows section 230 is a bad idea."

If we could move past the reflexive "well actually" there's a real issue people feel needs to be addressed.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#318

Post by kilo_bravo_3 »

ALL ENTITIES ON THE INTERNET MUST DISSEMINATE RUDY GIULIANI'S OBVIOUS RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA.

YOU MUST ALSO SPREAD AND AMPLIFY THE PRESIDENT'S PARTISAN MESSAGES.

FAILURE TO COMPLY MEANS THAT A CONSERVATIVE SENATE WILL HAUL YOU IN FOR QUESTIONING.

PLEASE SURRENDER CONTROL OF YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE NY POST AND THE ONE AMERICA NEWS NETWORK.

NON-COMPLIANCE INVITES "REGULATION".

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#319

Post by breakfastduck »

wow_yes wrote: post #225
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or on the side that Twitter thinks is the good side.

We are on the right side of history - progress always is. People like me are much more trustworthy because we're not motivated by greed, but for the desire for a better world.

You seem very certain of that, which is incredibly frightening.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#320

Post by RIMR »

blhack wrote: post #19

To the people constantly saying that twitter is a private company and should be allowed to do whatever they want: Would you support the same idea around electrical power? If the power company providing the power to the office at the NyPost decided that they had a political disagreement with them, would it be okay to just cut off their power? NyPost could just make their own power, of course, by purchasing a generator…

Ideally, private ownership of societally critical ownership wouldn't be legal. But America is a capitalist country, and Twitter owns their platform and has free speech by law.

And the equivocation of a tabloid to a utility company is just completely absurd...

Post reply on HN