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

601–610 of 763 posts

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

#601

Post by scoot_718 »

reaperducer wrote: post #527
quacked wrote: post #6

The Post publishes a lot of disreputable trash that's outright false or unproven, but more and more often, it seems that they release primary sources of information (especially videos) much earlier than other news outlets will, if the other news outlets do so at all. There have been multiple times when I've seen an insane video of something happening spreading around Twitter or WorldStar or some other "raw video" agg…

Post publishes a lot of disreputable trash that's outright false or unproven It doesn't matter. This strawman is presented every time this topic comes up. It's not about the quality of the Post's journalism. It's about whether Twitter should restrict it. I've been reading the Post off and on for the last 40 years, and you are correct that it is a rag. But it is a newspaper. A newspaper with a better reputation for re…

> A newspaper with a better reputation for reporting the news than Twitter.

Hard nope there.

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

#602

Post by NeverFade »

rbanffy wrote: post #545
reaperducer wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Post publishes a lot of disreputable trash that's outright false or unproven It doesn't matter. This strawman is presented every time this topic comes up. It's not about the quality of the Post's journalism. It's about whether Twitter should restrict it. I've been reading the Post off and on for the last 40 years, and you are correct that it is a rag. But it is a newspaper. A newspaper with a better reputation for re…

> It doesn't matter. This strawman is presented every time this topic comes up. It's not about the quality of the Post's journalism. It's about whether Twitter should restrict it. Twitter is a private company. They constantly, if unevenly, exercise their right to ban hate speech and what causes it. > But it is a newspaper. A newspaper with a better reputation for reporting the news than Twitter. Twitter is not a news…

> You admit it's a rag, that publishes some of the lowest quality journalism. It's also very politically biased, in a way that damages the very fabric of society. Restricting its reach is the responsible thing to do in their case.

Let's just let tech monopolies determine what information we can or cannot communicate. Definitely nothing wrong will come of it. In fact, it's "the responsible thing to do"!

Also, stating that NYP "publishes some of the lowest quality journalism" is an insane hyperbole with no basis in reality. It may not be a top newspaper, but it's also far from being the worst paper in the US.

This story, specifically, had more verifiable sources than plenty of recently published stories which cite only "anonymous" sources and are therefore completely unverifiable.

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

#603

Post by rbanffy »

adventured wrote: post #583
rbanffy wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't matter. This strawman is presented every time this topic comes up. It's not about the quality of the Post's journalism. It's about whether Twitter should restrict it. Twitter is a private company. They constantly, if unevenly, exercise their right to ban hate speech and what causes it. > But it is a newspaper. A newspaper with a better reputation for reporting the news than Twitter. Twitter is not a news…

> Twitter is a private company. They constantly, if unevenly, exercise their right to ban hate speech and what causes it. It's actually the uneven enforcement of their own terms of service that is primarily of issue and further whether their actions constitute an illegal campaign contribution to the Democrats by way of their intentionally tilted censorship. If the DOJ were doing its job, they would be crushing Twitte…

> their actions constitute an illegal campaign contribution to the Democrats by way of their intentionally tilted censorship.

The sheer volume of right wing propaganda that escapes their moderators would indicate the exact opposite. They suppressed this one so it wouldn't be glaringly obvious they ignore right wing abuses.

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

#604

Post by picardythird »

rightbyte wrote: post #593
picardythird wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But here you have a man who stormed a pizza parlor with an AR-15, ready to uncover the global cabal of pedophilia that has infiltrated the Democratic Party. Or the woman who won't vaccinate her children because she believes vaccines cause autism. Or the person, communicating via the satellites that circle the Earth, who believes that the Earth is flat. These people aren't rare - they're common. We live in an era of d…

Lack of mental institutions are to blame not free speech on Twitter and FB. How about not making policys to combat covid-5g and the flat earth club.

Twitter is not a bastion of free speech though, because a huge fraction of it is simply propaganda posing as free speech. On the day of the 2016 election, one of the top ten most re-tweeted accounts was a fake Russian account posing as an American conservative organization.

Covid-56 and flat earthers are some of the most outlandish examples, but the vast majority of misinformation is more subtle, and therefore more insidious. I'm not suggesting what the solution should be, but it's clear that complete un-regulation has lead to a completely broken information space.

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

#605

Post by rbanffy »

NeverFade wrote: post #602
rbanffy wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't matter. This strawman is presented every time this topic comes up. It's not about the quality of the Post's journalism. It's about whether Twitter should restrict it. Twitter is a private company. They constantly, if unevenly, exercise their right to ban hate speech and what causes it. > But it is a newspaper. A newspaper with a better reputation for reporting the news than Twitter. Twitter is not a news…

> You admit it's a rag, that publishes some of the lowest quality journalism. It's also very politically biased, in a way that damages the very fabric of society. Restricting its reach is the responsible thing to do in their case. Let's just let tech monopolies determine what information we can or cannot communicate. Definitely nothing wrong will come of it. In fact, it's "the responsible thing to do"! Also, stating…

> Let's just let tech monopolies determine what information we can or cannot communicate. Definitely nothing wrong will come of it.

The NY Post can still publish their materials on Gab or Parler. Their intended audience is probably there already.

> It may not be a top newspaper, but it's also far from being the worst paper in the US.

It's a Murdoch rag, with the usual Murdoch standard for quality and ethics. Lower than that it shouldn't be called a news outlet.

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

#606

Post by ethanwillis »

thisiszilff wrote: post #272
bigbubba wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GP's Google example concerns thermostats, not search. Google doesn't have a thermostat monopoly. Is it therefore okay for Google to remotely deactivate the thermostats of people they've decided to dislike?

It isn't a very good comparison given that those thermostats/locks aren't free and it's unlikely Google wouldn't like someone because of how they are using their thermostat. In this case, twitter provides the account and the objections are to how the account is being used.

Just because Twitter doesn't debit your bank account doesn't mean their service is free. They're selling you to any buyer who's willing to pay, and it's a lot of buyers.

Just because these companies engage in fancy accounting doesn't mean we aren't consumers in a traditional sense and doesn't mean we waive rights consumers typically are given.

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

#607

Post by Barrin92 »

NeverFade wrote: post #602
rbanffy wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't matter. This strawman is presented every time this topic comes up. It's not about the quality of the Post's journalism. It's about whether Twitter should restrict it. Twitter is a private company. They constantly, if unevenly, exercise their right to ban hate speech and what causes it. > But it is a newspaper. A newspaper with a better reputation for reporting the news than Twitter. Twitter is not a news…

> You admit it's a rag, that publishes some of the lowest quality journalism. It's also very politically biased, in a way that damages the very fabric of society. Restricting its reach is the responsible thing to do in their case. Let's just let tech monopolies determine what information we can or cannot communicate. Definitely nothing wrong will come of it. In fact, it's "the responsible thing to do"! Also, stating…

>Let's just let tech monopolies determine what information we can or cannot communicate. Definitely nothing wrong will come of it.

how is that worse than letting Rupert Murdoch control every newspaper, whose media conglomerate makes Twitter look tiny in comparison. As much as Dorsey an all the other techbros annoy me at least he's not an outright right-wing cartoon villain

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

#608

Post by NeverFade »

rbanffy wrote: post #605
NeverFade wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You admit it's a rag, that publishes some of the lowest quality journalism. It's also very politically biased, in a way that damages the very fabric of society. Restricting its reach is the responsible thing to do in their case. Let's just let tech monopolies determine what information we can or cannot communicate. Definitely nothing wrong will come of it. In fact, it's "the responsible thing to do"! Also, stating…

> Let's just let tech monopolies determine what information we can or cannot communicate. Definitely nothing wrong will come of it. The NY Post can still publish their materials on Gab or Parler. Their intended audience is probably there already. > It may not be a top newspaper, but it's also far from being the worst paper in the US. It's a Murdoch rag, with the usual Murdoch standard for quality and ethics. Lower th…

Here's what's happening: our communication is moving to private venues. These venues initially maintain freedom of speech. Once they become effective monopolies, they start arbitrarily cracking down on speech they dislike.

The vast majority of people are on these monopolistic platforms. Yes, dissenters can still publish on some obscure platforms that nobody is consuming.

If you ban a story on Twitter and Facebook, you are effectively ensuring the vast majority of readers will never get a chance to see it.

> It's a Murdoch rag, with the usual Murdoch standard for quality and ethics.

So convenient that you can know everything about The Post without apparently reading it at all.

Also, seems we no longer need to bother looking at facts or evidence. If a news story is vaguely associated with someone we dislike, we can just declare it wrongthink and dismiss it completely without further discussion.

In fact, you strongly advocate that it should be blocked from being published at all. If a piece of information is associated with a group or person we dislike for any reason, we should consign it to the memory hole. We shouldn't let people make up their own mind, we should make it for them.

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

#609

Post by vel0city »

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #127
gabereiser wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalistic integrity means vetting sources of “news”, especially in this day in age when so many videos are just clips out of context. I completely agree with Twitter keeping NY Post account disabled. Until they can prove to be a real news source, they are tabloid fake news. The fact they they will publish articles other news sites won’t means not that they are “The Rogue News Organization in a sea of Liberal Media…

Twitter shouldn't decide for me what I may or may not read.

Twitter doesn't decide for you what you may or may not read. I imagine you got here from some path other than Twitter. Therefore, you reading this reply to your comment comes irrespective to Twitter deciding what is allowable on their platform.

If the moderators of this site decide my comment is out of line with the standards this site tries to uphold, does this make me unable to communicate entirely? No, I'm still able to write whatever nonesense on plenty of other websites. Or I can host my own website where I can freely post whatever nonsense I choose to post. All the way up to the point where no ISP will offer me an internet connection or all the regional number organizations refuse to give me even a single IP address.

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

#610

Post by core-questions »

heavyset_go wrote: post #572
core-questions wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's called the Overton Window, and it moves over time. Generally speaking in America it has moved leftward continually since the American Revolution, which was a left-wing act of protest against a monarchical government (which, on a flatness hierarchy view of the left/right axis, is among the furthest right political systems possible). Each successive major shift in American politics has been a shift towards t…

> even being accepted by the Republican Party as simply the law of the land and not a subject for discussion any more This is the GOP party platform for 2016 & 2020: > Our laws and our government’s regulations should recognize marriage as the union of one man and one woman and actively promote married family life as the basis of a stable and prosperous society. For that reason, as explained elsewhere in this platform…

> This is the GOP party platform for 2016 & 2020:

Surely you understand the difference between things written in a policy platform and things actually done in practice. There is no GOP rep who is out there stirring anything up on reversing this and despite the words "urging its reversal" there is not and will likely not ever be any action in this direction.

I can't really imagine someone following American politics for more than a year and not realizing this. Almost none of the policy white papers these parties and candidates write will ever be implemented, at all.

The GOP almost never does anything its base actually wants, in the socially-conservative sense. They just pretend they will, to get votes; the same way the Democrats pretend they're going to do any number of things for their base that never happen. It's just kayfabe, it's just an act to get you to vote and legitimize their power so that they can continue to do whatever is easiest and most expedient for each individual politician and player at any given moment.

Post reply on HN