Why the Twitter files are in fact a big deal

Post by yucky » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 10:59 PM UTC

encryptluks2 wrote: post #10

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…

Are we to believe that the intent of the Twitter nothingburger isn't meant to be a left-wing vs right-wing issue? I see it as nothing than a political ploy by Musk to cater towards Republicans ignoring their own misdeeds, and trying to set aim on Democrats.

Post by ttctciyf » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 12:15 AM UTC

smoldesu wrote: post #20

ttctciyf wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 proporti…

Post by akolbe » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 4:04 PM UTC

smoldesu wrote: post #16

akolbe wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Post by moe091 » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 4:41 PM UTC

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…