Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

jacobin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#11

Post by smoldesu »

akolbe wrote: post #8
moe091 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with that point, but this article basically just a report of one small piece of a huge issue we've known about for years, that so obviously encompasses both sides of the political spectrum, and tries to use it to make the left look bad. Which I agree, they do suck, for things like this and many others, but so does the right and the center and every other direction you can think of. This actively harms the pro…

I agree that it is a bipartisan problem, but then I thought that was the exact point the article was trying to make: ... many things could change in the years ahead that make the existing status quo more perilous for leftists: Twitter could start hiring conservatives; it could overcorrect in the face of right-wing criticism, or buckle under mounting FBI pressure; national security agencies could embark on a fiercer c…

There's a simple misconception in the article that might help re-frame this:

> The best defense against this is to start opposing these trends now, not when it’s too late.

It is, ostensibly, too late. We had a chance to protest this, back when the roadmaps were leaking and government collaboration wasn't fully instated yet. But it wasn't just progressives who didn't care, conservatives also rolled over and let this happen. It's both a failure of the Free Market and our democratic process that this happens in the first place.

The point is, now is a hell of a time to start getting mad at government intervention. We've proven that Twitter is a private platform that can be owned and traded like a deck of Pokemon cards. We've proven that every major social media company is in collusion with the government's surveillance agencies. Now, that people discover shadowbanning is a real thing, everyone is expecting riots in the street on behalf of Twitter's users. Really though, if you're lazy enough to stay on Twitter after the acquisition, you're probably not motivated enough to protest it's leadership.

Here are three potential solutions to the problem you perceive:

- Allow courts to compel private platforms to host free speech

- Use the free market to develop a compelling alternative

- Accept Twitter's corruption as a natural process of the free market

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#12

Post by [deleted] »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #9

It is amazing to me how many people continue to obfuscate and/or downplay the revelations of the Twitter Files by pointing to the fact that Twitter is a private company that can do what they want. The issue isn't what Twitter did, the issue is that government agencies and politicians were directing Twitter to ban and censor people based on the content of their speech. This should be incredibly chilling to anyone who…

[deleted]

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#13

Post by commandlinefan »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #9

It is amazing to me how many people continue to obfuscate and/or downplay the revelations of the Twitter Files by pointing to the fact that Twitter is a private company that can do what they want. The issue isn't what Twitter did, the issue is that government agencies and politicians were directing Twitter to ban and censor people based on the content of their speech. This should be incredibly chilling to anyone who…

> This should be incredibly chilling to anyone who cares about free speech

I've been continually amazed, since more and more of the general population has become represented on the internet, how few people do care about free speech. Belief in freedom of speech seems to be a fringe position that's somehow managed to stay in the US legal system in spite of depressingly overwhelming opposition.

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#15

Post by akolbe »

smoldesu wrote: post #11
akolbe wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it is a bipartisan problem, but then I thought that was the exact point the article was trying to make: ... many things could change in the years ahead that make the existing status quo more perilous for leftists: Twitter could start hiring conservatives; it could overcorrect in the face of right-wing criticism, or buckle under mounting FBI pressure; national security agencies could embark on a fiercer c…

There's a simple misconception in the article that might help re-frame this: > The best defense against this is to start opposing these trends now, not when it’s too late. It is, ostensibly, too late. We had a chance to protest this, back when the roadmaps were leaking and government collaboration wasn't fully instated yet. But it wasn't just progressives who didn't care, conservatives also rolled over and let this h…

It'll take a while for the dust to settle, I think. For now, it must be said that if it weren't for Musk, we wouldn't have this info. Some people at least will see this as a reason to stay on (or re-join) Twitter.

The nice thing about Mastodon is that it is federated, with servers in various different countries and jurisdictions. As such, it's not that vulnerable to pressures issuing from a specific nation state. I like that about it. A lot of people who feel wary about Musk are there already. That's a good thing.

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#16

Post by smoldesu »

akolbe wrote: post #15
smoldesu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a simple misconception in the article that might help re-frame this: > The best defense against this is to start opposing these trends now, not when it’s too late. It is, ostensibly, too late. We had a chance to protest this, back when the roadmaps were leaking and government collaboration wasn't fully instated yet. But it wasn't just progressives who didn't care, conservatives also rolled over and let this h…

It'll take a while for the dust to settle, I think. For now, it must be said that if it weren't for Musk, we wouldn't have this info. Some people at least will see this as a reason to stay on (or re-join) Twitter. The nice thing about Mastodon is that it is federated , with servers in various different countries and jurisdictions. As such, it's not that vulnerable to pressures issuing from a specific nation state. I…

The dust settled, that's what I'm saying. We already know how much people care about their privacy and free speech; they don't.

Also, I have no idea what Mastodon's significance is in this conversation. Did I miss something?

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#17

Post by ttctciyf »

felixgallo wrote: post #14

I'm looking forward to Jacobin's takedown of Fox, which is plainly and on its face several orders of magnitude more complicit in fascist cooperation, and several orders of magnitude more impactful than Twitter.

It's hardly news that Fox is essentially fascist propaganda, as Jacobin has pointed out at https://jacobin.com/2022/09/right-wing-media-wwii-newspapers...

> In the 1930s, six right-wing oligarchs used the US’s and UK’s largest newspapers to spout sensationalist xenophobia, and at times even boost fascist propaganda. Today, Fox News and other right-wing mass media outlets are using the very same blueprint ...

Whereas the politicized gaming of twitter's moderation system is comparatively unacknowledged and even denied in the face of the evidence.

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#18

Post by ttctciyf »

smoldesu wrote: post #2

They unfortunately fail to explain the "why" in their title. They label the behavior as "political suppression" but fail to explain how those politics are suppressed or how that suppression violates our constitutional rights. In fact, I'd even argue that it's Twitter's right to do what they want with their control; that's their prerogative as a private business. Don't like it? Regulate it.

Quoting from the article; I think you're looking for the bit I italicised in the second paragraph

> The files confirm something that we’d previously only learned through a lawsuit: that Twitter and other tech executives were having regular monthly and even weekly meetings with not just the FBI and its Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF) — the eighty-person counterintelligence division made to combat foreign disinformation campaigns — but pretty much every security agency under the sun. Besides the bureau, those named include the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, state governments like that of California, the justice and state departments, even the National Security Agency (NSA), which requested to be included in a special Signal channel set up for the election period to let government agencies feed information to social media companies, or “the industry.”

[...]

> The significance of this should be obvious. Many shortsightedly dismissed the first Twitter Files release about Twitter’s outrageous censorship of the New York Post on the grounds that because the government wasn’t involved, such censorship shouldn’t concern us. That premise is wrong, but even if we were to accept it, the fact is that the FBI and a host of other shadowy security agencies are clearly knee-deep in the decisions over what Twitter and other companies decide to censor.

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#19

Post by bilirubin »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #9

It is amazing to me how many people continue to obfuscate and/or downplay the revelations of the Twitter Files by pointing to the fact that Twitter is a private company that can do what they want. The issue isn't what Twitter did, the issue is that government agencies and politicians were directing Twitter to ban and censor people based on the content of their speech. This should be incredibly chilling to anyone who…

[dead]

Re: Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

#20

Post by smoldesu »

ttctciyf wrote: post #18
smoldesu wrote: post #2

They unfortunately fail to explain the "why" in their title. They label the behavior as "political suppression" but fail to explain how those politics are suppressed or how that suppression violates our constitutional rights. In fact, I'd even argue that it's Twitter's right to do what they want with their control; that's their prerogative as a private business. Don't like it? Regulate it.

Quoting from the article; I think you're looking for the bit I italicised in the second paragraph > The files confirm something that we’d previously only learned through a lawsuit: that Twitter and other tech executives were having regular monthly and even weekly meetings with not just the FBI and its Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF) — the eighty-person counterintelligence division made to combat foreign disinform…

That's certainly a thesis of sorts, but I don't think it's much of an argument.

- Twitter is a privately-owned, for-profit platform that can ultimately decide what stays and goes

- The New York Post isn't protected by special rights or Twitter rules that normal users aren't subject to

- The dismissive response to this 'leak' is not unsubstantiated, since we've seen much more harrowing releases with much less proportional reactions (see: Snowden, Wikileaks, et. al)

Considering those points, it's hard to listen to the Twitter Files with a straight face. Not only is none of the behavior criminal, but we didn't even learn anything here. We already knew that Twitter worked with the government during the election season to fight whatever they consider 'misinformation'. Even before that, Snowden leaked the PRISM roadmap that clearly shows Twitter and Facebook with FBI/NSA correspondence.

So again, I'm not sure if I follow the author. Not an attack on you, I understand that you're trying to cite relevant source material, but I feel like their thesis can be easily refuted.

Post reply on HN