Live data from Hacker News

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

melovedata.com

701–710 of 763 posts

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

#701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not gay, so I’ll offer an analogy. I’m a brown guy with a beard from a Muslim country and with a Muslim last name. I found my friends’ (sincere) concern about Trump’s campaign rhetoric to be odd, because I didn’t find it alarming myself. (Apparently 30% of Muslims polled did not.) I thought it was distasteful and counterproductive—pissing away a demographic George W. Bush won in 2000–but I felt all the rhetoric o…

This Andrew Sullivan? "In 2003, he wrote he was no longer able to support the American conservative movement, as he was disaffected with the Republican Party's continued rightward shift on social issues during the George W. Bush era"

Sullivan identifies as a conservative and sometimes a Republican: https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/22/books/review/Brooks.t.htm...

> “The conservatism I grew up around” Sullivan writes on the second page of the book, “was a combination of lower taxes, less government spending, freer trade, freer markets, individual liberty, personal responsibility and a strong anti-Communist foreign policy.” His heroes were Thatcher, Reagan, Solzhenitsyn, Havel, Hayek and Orwell.

Sullivan is ideologically similar to, and a fan of, Anthony Kennedy, who was a life-long Republican: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/06/anthony-kennedy-and-... (noting Kennedy’s “pragmatic libertarianism — his belief in limited government, pluralism, moderation, and social cohesion”).

It’s not really as simple as “Republicans moved too far to the right and he’s a liberal now.” For example, Sullivan is a devout Catholic who thinks Roe was wrong to take the decision on how to regulate abortion out of the hands of voters: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/05/andrew-sullian-a-way.... (He thinks voters would converge on laws like in France or Germany, allowing abortion up to 12 weeks with limited exemptions after that.)

He supported Bush (and thought Gore tried to steal the 2000 election) and the Iraq war initially. He soured on it later and reeled at Bush’s deficits and fiscal excess, and Bush’s support for the federal marriage amendment. He supported Ron Paul for the Republican primary. He hates Hilary Clinton but begrudgingly supported her against Trump. He is very much against the rise of critical theory and wokeness: https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/the-roots-of-wokeness. On LGBT issues, he thinks “the war has been won” after Gorsuch’s decision in Bostock: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/when-is-it-time-to-c.... In particular, he opposes the Equality Act’s attempts to eliminate religious freedom exemptions.

Circling back to the point: this is why a quarter of gay people identify as Republican (though Trump has been very unpopular). Most people have heterodox political views and don’t fit neatly into any particular camp. And the parties shift over time to capture different blocs so folks who aren’t strong partisans can find themselves shifting around. There’s plenty of people who would support the party of Biden over the party of Trump, but the party of Marco Rubio over the party of Bernie Sanders.

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

#702

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalists have an obligation to protect their sources, which prevents many stories from being independently verified. However they can be verified by other news outlets, who have their own sources. The "losers and suckers" story was independently verified by NYT, WaPo, and AP. But the NYPost has not been verified by anyone, nor they did seek verification, nor did they even ask Biden for comment, because they know t…

The NYP story was blocked by Twitter and Facebook immediately upon publication. Why wasn't the "losers and suckers" story likewise blocked until it was verified? Both stories had no external verification upon publication. One was blocked immediately. The other never was. > The "losers and suckers" story was independently verified by NYT, WaPo, and AP. One can't "independently" verify a story based purely on anonymous…

The NYP asked for comment. What they didn't do was show Biden the laptop or documents they claimed were authentic. Then they ran a claim that Biden refused to refute the documents (without admitting that they refused to show him the documents or laptop.)

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

#703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can appreciate the deeply principled stand people on HN tend to make about this issue. I know there is a libertarian streak here around the access to content and information. I don't share those values, and think unchecked distribution of manipulated content creates a worse outcome for our society; I'd argue it is more inherently dystopian than straight-up government censored speech, which of course is not what's a…

Well argued point. However, I would counter that we should not do evil in the pursuit of good. Let's find another way that does not limit free speech. It will be a harder solution to find sure, but the converse is too dangerous and nuanced to be implemented. It also gives social media companies undue influence over our democracy.

I suppose at the end of the day, I just don't see Twitter or Facebook playing some level of QA in manipulated media as censorship of free speech. Requiring some level of investigative work before publishing potential election-changing "news" doesn't seem at all controversial to me.

Social media companies already have undue influence over our democracy. I think we've already seen the damage they can do when they take a hands-off approach. There is no action they can take (or not take) that will not have major political implications. Do nothing and misinformation spreads like wildfire, likely first by bad-faith actors then by good and bad-faith actors. But doing something is fraught. Yet, I advocate for trying something over keeping one's hand off the till as we're talking about the real world here, and it is marginalized and under-served communities that ultimately pay the price.

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

#704

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…

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

That's not true. NYP:s audience is much bigger than Gab or Parler.

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

#705
post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Twitter is a private company. They constantly, if unevenly, exercise their right to ban hate speech and what causes it. So is Verizon. Do you want to live in a world where your phone gets turned off if they don't like the conversation?

You have no intrinsic right to a mobile telephone, so we do live in this world. If it made business sense for them to do this, they would. Call in a few threats to local businesses or SWAT someone and see how long it takes for your phone to get disabled.

Do you have evidence of that ever happening? I've never read that in a swatting story.

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

#706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Twitter is a private company. They constantly, if unevenly, exercise their right to ban hate speech and what causes it. So is Verizon. Do you want to live in a world where your phone gets turned off if they don't like the conversation?

To that point, a small number of companies entirely dominate all social media at this point: Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Pinterest, Snapchat, Tiktok. Collectively they form an extreme oligopoly position, something quite comparable to the telecom oligopoly. They should be held to a different standard accordingly, if they want to retain such power in our society. If only a few of them simultaneously collude to censor, i…

It's tautological to say that the sites people use ate the sites people use. Putting TikTok on your list shows the emptiness of the argument. When a new site offers something the others don't, people migrate.

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

#707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, almost everything on ZH is predicting catastrophe - ZH is rife with prepper-flavored "this is the big one" reports on things like FEMA operations, rumors of potential false flag attacks, and of course various financial instrument movements. 99% of what ZH says is the end of all things fades into nothingness. ZH is the canonical example of a correct-twice-daily broken clock.

Exactly this! Thank you. ZeroHedge almost seems to be designed to induce anxiety and spread disinformation.

It does what it says on the tin -- zero hedge.

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

#708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it 'trash' to be upset that Hunter Biden made 600k/yr from a no-show job that looks super crooked? No, because that's clearly verifiable facts summarized by an opinion. Now ask "Is it trash to acknowledge that Hunter Biden had his dad use his influence to replace a straight-laced Ukrainian prosecutor with a corrupt stooge so Hunter could enrich himself?" That's trash. Or: "Is it trash to point out how Soros-fund…

It gets into the realm of speculation with partial facts, but you can make a pretty good case that Biden was involved with replacing one corrupt stooge with another one, who then just happened to drop all investigations into Hunter Biden's shady employer. Matt Taibbi has done some good reporting on this lately. You could cast doubt on Taibbi or an any narrative that fills in the blanks in some places, but compare to…

I do not cast doubt on Taibbi. I think the work he is doing is great, and should have been where the effort was in the first place. But so much of that particular topic is just circumstantial chum in the water that either few people actually investigated, or those that did could find little real supporting evidence.

But let me use Taibbi's own words here: “If something comes in and we don’t know the exact providence of it, that doesn’t mean we can’t publish it. All we have to do is establish that it’s true, and a lot of important stories have been broken that way.”

Ironically, Taibbi seems to say this as a criticism for Twitter reacting to the NYPost story. Except the NYPost did no work to establish it was true and even hired a Hannity employee to publish it since their own journalists wouldn't do it. That to me is the problem.

Twitter and Facebook, through action or inaction, now impact our democracy. Their action or inaction gives them responsibility whether asked for or not, conferred or not. I think this creates a need to act responsibly. I don't know how this should best be done, but I'm categorically against a complete "hands-off" given the expertise we've seen at creating and spreading manipulated content.

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

#709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is it fake or is it russian disinformation? I can't keep up with you types.

Who deleted your response to ZeteticElench? You, or the mods? Usually when they delete something, they include a comment that says "this comment was deleted because it violates our community standards" or whatever.

I absolutely did not delete anything. Maybe I got 'zucced'

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

#710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source on the late December? Early January is irrelevant, but I would like to see the former if that is a true claim.

There is also this October 2019 thread [0] which mentions a coronavirus-like bioweapon, which, like the "High Incident Project" thread [1] (covered by snopes here [2]) is often pointed to by conspiracy theorists as examples of insiders leaking information on 4chan before events of global significance. In my analysis I find these are examples of fitting events to predictions after the fact; the huge number of 'larp' t…

That 4chan thread is talking about the October 2019 report from

https://www.ghsindex.org/

sponsored in part by the Gates Foundation and reported by the Washington Post and others, retweeted by Joe Biden.

This was not secret insider information.

Post reply on HN