Live data from Hacker News

Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

taibbi.substack.com

591–596 of 596 posts

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the public officials involved mean it has a clear public interest. It's clear only to you. You cannot normally legally publish hacked or stolen photos of celebrities. The personal, intimate, or family photos of Hunter Biden almost certainly do not meet the bar for public interest. Twitter is not liable here. But as a private company they're allowed to have a policy against linking to hacked or stolen material on th…

> It's clear only to you. Really? Who would be the judge of that? The suppression itself is hard evidence to the contrary.

That's circular reasoning. According to Twitter's statement, they blocked directly linking to hacked materials (which includes personal, intimate photos of Hunter Biden). They haven't suppressed any other discussion on Hunter Biden or the contents of that laptop.

Maybe you don't believe Twitter. Maybe Twitter suppressed the story for political reasons and you feel that proves the hacked content is of public interest. But if Twitter was honest then their policy is just to not allow direct links to any hacked or stolen photos. It doesn't mean they're important.

How are personal photos of Hunter Biden with his family important to public interest?

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#592
One line hit me right in the gut.

> “If you get a piece of information in the hands of the right American, it can absolutely spin out of control and make the national news in a couple of days,”

We laugh about Chinese censorship, but our reliance on a few outlets to get our news has made us no worse.

At what point is it Okay for people to start to die? History has proven (With a few caveats i'm sure) that real change happens with force. Has America lost it's ability to rebel against tyranny?

America was built where small pox had a much higher death % - Were they forced to wear masks and stay inside? People die, it's a fact of life. Now we the people are forced to deal with the economic backlash that any idiot could have told you was going to happen. The media blocked any 'misinformation that relates to corona virus' and labeled them 'Anti-maskers'.

Alot more people are going to die than the corona virus could have ever killed. The amount of mental health problems exacerbated, jobs lost, lives ruined is immesurable, but the one KPI we can all rely on is total number of coronavirus infected. It's a joke and we haven't even gotten to the fun part yet where we have a 34% debt surety rate based on the two massive stimulus' that are going to be passed.

America was built on free-press and if say some entity tried to bury a story, it'd result in people dying, publisher being burned, or boycotted.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#593

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 deci…

Note that there is a difference between "publish all posts" and "deliver direct messages", and Twitter is blocking the latter as well, as far as I can tell.

Depends on what you mean by "deliver direct messages".

Does it mean "deliver a direct message to one or more named recipients" or does it mean "broadcast/publish a message to the public"

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reporters at the New York Post thought the story was so dubious that they refused to be named in the byline, and the basic premise directly contradicts the historical (and easily verifiable) facts surrounding the Shokin’s removal.

The reporters who wrote the story were so skeptical of what they wrote they didn't add their names to their own story... that they themselves wrote. That's pretty stupid and unlikely. More likely, people were concerned about the real world ramifications of having their names on the story (e.g. getting killed or harassed). I understand that this is a talking point but use your brain.

Nice try, but the reporters in question explained their reason for not wanting their names on it. [1]

[1] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/10/new-york-post-inside...

"Use your brain" indeed.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that there is a difference between "publish all posts" and "deliver direct messages", and Twitter is blocking the latter as well, as far as I can tell.

Depends on what you mean by "deliver direct messages". Does it mean "deliver a direct message to one or more named recipients" or does it mean "broadcast/publish a message to the public"

The former.

Re: Suppression is a bigger scandal than the actual story

#596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because the news media you follow isn't covering the content of the story. That's not surprising, because it's manufactured and bogus.

Are you claiming that the content that has been published is manufactured and bogus (aka fabricated)? I don't think anyone has actually claimed that. What makes you say this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/jkjeib/comment/ga...
Post reply on HN