Earlier quoted context omitted.
If democracy got you Trump why would more democracy be the solution?
Democracy didn't get us Trump. The Electoral College got us Trump.
No post body was provided.
“Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
481–490 of 1001 posts
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#482Sounds like a spectacular waste of time that will never agree on anything, so why even bother?
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#483Earlier quoted context omitted.
Babylon Bee was not first to “target” Levine. Washington Post, for example, has run an article on Levine before Bee, also for the sole purpose of Levine being trans: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/10/19/levine-tran... If WaPo can bring out “random bureaucrats” to public attention for sole reason of being trans, why can’t Bee do the same?
Giving an award to a Black person has slightly different connotations when it is done at a NAACP meeting compared to a Klan meeting.
What a ridiculous comparison. Let's stick to arguing in good faith, shall we?
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
If democracy got you Trump why would more democracy be the solution?
This is the reason: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_backsliding
Trump is an autocrat with goals to become a monarch. He proactively eroded democracy during his term, and continues to attempt to.
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#485Earlier quoted context omitted.
A bunch of accounts like The Babylon Bee and Ye have been unbanned w/o input from any such committee of diverse viewpoints. I don't have much faith that Musk will not act unilaterally in service of his friends and allies.
Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. Kanye's ban, he's just a mentally ill person. I don't think he meant "death con" he just didn't know that it's actually "def con." His remarks are still reprehensible. Twitter's whole moderation problem has been it i…
Isn't this just a long way to saying you think this is the right decision, but doesn't change the fact that it was arbitrary? Except I'm not even sure the decision actually happened. There still aren't any recent posts from them. You might need to wait a bit to know
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. They didn’t even make a joke. They just called trans woman a man. It was hate speech, pure and simple. I am very afraid for the future of twitter now. Hate speech is going to run rampant on that platform now.
Not to mention that the person who attacked Pelosi's husband with a hammer was also posting transphobic crap (along with a lot of other right-wing garbage). Hate online definitely has real world impact.
Hate anywhere has real world impact.
There’s a lot of hate in the history books, 99% of it predating the internet.
Are those that engage in hate online more or less likely to act on it than those who engage in person? Are these interactions compelling them to use their voice off-line?
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#487Earlier quoted context omitted.
The piece satirized the confusion between sex and gender. It has only been very, very recently that we have gone from "gender is a social construct" to "sex is a social construct." It's still a highly debated topic and well within the public sphere of debate. Also, this person was a public official and was in the news from general news outlets (named Woman of the Year) which puts them well within the public realm of…
> It has only been very, very recently that we have gone from "gender is a social construct" to "sex is a social construct." What? Since when is sex a social construct?
Some people believe sex is a spectrum, or that it can be changed, but it’s super-fringe and mostly reflects ignorance of the difference between sex and gender rather than being a serious philosophical position.
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#488Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. Twitter banned the Babylon Bee for targeting a random and rather anonymous bureaucrat that likely isn't among the 1000 most powerful people in government in the US for the sole purpose that she is trans. This target…
The piece satirized the confusion between sex and gender. It has only been very, very recently that we have gone from "gender is a social construct" to "sex is a social construct." It's still a highly debated topic and well within the public sphere of debate. Also, this person was a public official and was in the news from general news outlets (named Woman of the Year) which puts them well within the public realm of…
There is no right to zero consequences for speaking freely.
I say give users the moderation power and let aggregate voting dictate content that remains visible.
No one wants public control of democracy though. What these guys want is a business friendly soapbox.
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
Libel/slander are famously hard to prove in the US. Sure you're not thinking of the UK? Are peer nations substantially more liberal on copyright infringement than the US? I haven't really heard of that. Really, it seemed like other countries like Japan and Germany were stricter.
Didn’t an entertainer in the US recently get sued for millions of dollars over Defamation simply for repeating a popular internet conspiracy theory on his show-that some public figures were supposedly “crisis actors”? (Peoples who’s names he never even mentioned, at that..) If calling public figures actors is all it takes for them to successfully sue for millions, the bar seems incredibly low.
> Didn’t an entertainer in the US recently get sued for millions of dollars over Defamation simply for repeating a popular internet conspiracy theory on his show-that some public figures were supposedly “crisis actors”?
No.
First, the Sandy Hook parents were not public figures.
Second, Jones and Infowars did significantly more than just make claims about people being crisis actors (though, that in itself absolutely can be defamatory in that it was a false statement of fact). There were also claims that some parent's fabricated their daughter's identify and then faked her death in order to steal money from hard-working Americans.
Third, this was not a matter of Jones simply making an assertion once. He repeated these claims for years, which led to a significant and ongoing harassment of the family.
The original complaint is here, though I'll note that it's from 2018 and much more evidence was discovered since the complaint was filed: https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInqu....
Fourth, Jones refused to participate in the lawsuit itself, deliberately and repeatedly not complying with repeated discovery orders. This led to a default judgement against him.
Fifth, an entire trial was held on how much damage Jones' defamatory statements and unfair trade practices caused. A jury of his peers determined that Jones' defamatory actions caused $965 Million dollars in damages.
So, I think your characterization of it as "an entertainer simply repeating a popular internet conspiracy theory on his show" is an absolutely incomplete summary of what happened, and why he was found to be liable for his actions.
Which jurisdiction(s) do you think would have afforded more protections to Jones' defamatory conduct?
The entire docket can be found here: https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail....
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#490Earlier quoted context omitted.
That happened before elon officially took over. He replied to a question about it on Twitter and i really don’t see him lying about it. Im not a elon fan. At all. but the knee jerk reaction he gets at this point is kind of deserved… however you’re better off not falling into that trap.
Quoted post unavailable.
Just my opinion. But why would you lie about what will become a fairly big piece of news right before you are about to go through and be cutting a bunch of jobs. It would be almost certain to leak.