Interested in a dialogue now they helped put their guy in office. The power of this company is chilling.
Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
181–190 of 373 posts
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's comparable - however yes, bad actors and bad actions are decentralized to a degree. The different between China and the US is the CCP is in "permanent" tyrannical control vs. the US et al have democratic elections and at least the society, the people, have the chance to evolve society to elect better people who will steer the ship better towards the ideal global society.
Electoral politics in the US has done nothing to stop the US from invading countries around the world (particularly in the Middle East) for the past half a century+. Who would I vote for if I wanted to stop bombing people? There is no one.
Then run for political leadership.
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#183[deleted]
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#184The only reasonable policy is to ban all world leaders from Twitter. As world leaders, they can speak elsewhere. If someone is accused of being a world leader, and you have adequate identification, it's fairly easy to confirm or deny. In the case of a disputed election, maybe both candidates could be considered leaders until the dispute is resolved.
The problem is that ever since banning Trump they have less usage on the site. So they need those "exciting" world leaders. Telling Twitter to ban all world leaders is the opposite of what they want. They want to be able to have all those people on there, while not being blamed for leaving "bad" content up.
They need those exciting leaders if their sole goal is to maximize their profits. If they also want to have a world to spend their profits in, it's worth considering that some tactics may be different.
This is unusual territory, since it's not all that common for one company to be so closely involved with what could literally have been violent insurrection, even leading to outright war. It didn't, but it came far closer than the leadership of Twitter liked. They want to be ubiquitous, but not so pervasive as to be existential.
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#185Marketing tip: Always ask the public for input and consult with "experts" before doing what you intended to all along.
Seriously this is such a BS cover their rear-end from congress move. Now they want to poll the public, get feedback, and move in a democratic fashion? It’s now after the fact they selectively decided which US presidents can be on Twitter and which cannot with zero debate or thoughtfulness of consequences of free speech.
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#186Color me dubious that any policy will be enforced evenly.
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#187I’m much more interested in world leaders’ approach to Twitter. I expect we’ll be seeing some object lessons in the difference between power and influence.
The way Twitter is framing this is really interesting, they're evidently operating under the assumption that they are in the position of power.
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#188I don't really have much of an opinion on how twitter should approach world leaders. I'm more interested in the approach of world leaders to twitter. As far as I'm concerned, people receiving salaries from the taxpayer shouldn't be spending their time writing free copy for twitter. They should be communicating with the public via government operated websites, or press conferences covered by multiple media organizatio…
Do you also oppose the US President holding press conferences for privately owned broadcast TV channels?
I think it is reasonable as long as there are barriers for consumption and people can be selectively limited in their ability to interact with the broadcasts.
Maybe if Twitter was brought in as a government contractor, including the inability to restrict people from interacting with government tweets and accounts (any non-government entities would fall under the private business side of things and not be included in this restriction) then I think it would be reasonable for the government to use Twitter.
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#189A Republican Congresswoman was just locked out of her Twitter account prior to some kind of Dem resolution, at least if you believe https://www.mrctv.org/blog/marjorie-taylor-green-reportedly-... as a source of truth. Nothing to see here, move along.
marjorie taylor green requires more detail than simply “a republican congresswoman” - she’s blamed forest fires on jewish space lasers, among other racist, homophobic, and transphobic conspiracy theories
She is still an elected member of congress, and from what I hear - a rather popular one, regardless of her "tinfoil hatery".
Opposition parties should _never_ have the power to just expel people they don't like from the opposing side.
I'm sure it's purely coincidence she is locked from her twitter account on the same day that congress will be voting on a resolution on whether or not to expel her.
Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the speech is legal it should not be censored or moderated in any way. Any deviation from that results in the technocrats interfering with the flow of legal information and manipulation of social, economic, and political processes - which is in large part how we ended up with the events of recent months in my opinion.
What if it's a private company? Hackernews famously moderates their comment section, to the benefit of all. Why can't this happen on Twitter?
Twitter/HN is not an apples/apples comparison... but sure, Twitter is completely within their _current_ lawful rights to moderate and censor whatever content they want. But I would posit that they are actually causing more harm than good through these efforts, and they've now firmly placed themselves in a total quagmire in doing so.