So is this Taibbi carrying water for Musk? That's disappointing.
The Twitter Files
191–200 of 1001 posts
Re: The Twitter Files
#192I'm a moderate, not a Democrat and not a Republican. I think people on the left have a blind spot here, that the more suppression they use, the more division they create, and the more moderates and people on the right grow to resent them. I would have identified as a Democrat on pretty much every issue, but this authoritarian suppression of speech and ideas has just pushed me away from that side completely. At this p…
What if enough of us could join the Libertarian party but “moderate” the Libertarian platform to make it more mainstream and … moderate.
Really we probably need to fix all censorship issues first somehow.
Re: The Twitter Files
#193I'm a moderate, not a Democrat and not a Republican. I think people on the left have a blind spot here, that the more suppression they use, the more division they create, and the more moderates and people on the right grow to resent them. I would have identified as a Democrat on pretty much every issue, but this authoritarian suppression of speech and ideas has just pushed me away from that side completely. At this p…
The whole idea that there are "sides" to be had is IMHO extremely sad in the first place. This whole bipartisan system bullshit is causing so much damage, and its been going on since at least the 70s.
“There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.” -John Adams in letter to Johnathan Jackson, 1780.
Re: The Twitter Files
#194>>>Ace: your take is the blame is being placed on Twitter and not the police state apparatus?
> Yes, the FBI is being excused, and it's being claimed that there was just a breakdown at Twitter, rather than deliberate suppression.
https://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=402164
Tyrants outsource the speech suppression to private industry so they can turn the screws while doing victory laps about supporting the First Amendment.
What a mess.
Re: The Twitter Files
#195Most concerning thing here is that this proves political parties (including the white house[0]) have a direct line to Twitter[1] to get stuff they dislike removed. One would have to assume that there was also a direct line to other social medial platforms. It's so wild to have the slimy-ness of our American political system be revealed in yet another way. So in America you cannot say negative things about political l…
What was the content of the "handled" tweets, though? I think that matters a lot. For example, the RealJamesWood tweet (from [0]) seems to be a leaked nude of Hunter; it was most likely (safe to say) posted non-consensually, and I don't really see a big difference between that kind of tweet and revenge porn.
Having "stuff they dislike" removed would be one thing, but using the direct line at Twitter for reporting explicit ToS violations isn't a big deal.
Re: The Twitter Files
#196Most concerning thing here is that this proves political parties (including the white house[0]) have a direct line to Twitter[1] to get stuff they dislike removed. One would have to assume that there was also a direct line to other social medial platforms. It's so wild to have the slimy-ness of our American political system be revealed in yet another way. So in America you cannot say negative things about political l…
[deleted]
Re: The Twitter Files
#197Most concerning thing here is that this proves political parties (including the white house[0]) have a direct line to Twitter[1] to get stuff they dislike removed. One would have to assume that there was also a direct line to other social medial platforms. It's so wild to have the slimy-ness of our American political system be revealed in yet another way. So in America you cannot say negative things about political l…
How is this surprising? People get things resolved via Hacker News when people comment on CEO account comments (Stripe comes to mind). Nearly every company probably has direct lines of access for resolutions for VIPs, politicians not excluded.
Not surprising but sad.
Politicians should be excluded from what you're talking about IMO.
They're elected to serve the people and stand for our American beliefs including the freedom of speech. A political party (the DNC in this case) getting tweets removed probably isn't a 1st amendment violation. But it's really shady and anyone from government (the white house in this case) getting tweets removed is likely violating the first amendment (or coming REALLY close to it).
Re: The Twitter Files
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Party officials were directly emailing twitter executives, the executives specifically mentioned the "Biden Team", Ro Khanna wasn't necessarily against censoring the story she was upset that Twitter shut down the Trump admin's press secretary account for dm'ing the NY Post Story and that Republicans on the Hill were rightfully so making a big deal out of that. Blatant, let me repeat in caps, BLATANT partisan censorin…
> Party officials were directly emailing twitter executives Thinking that this isn't happening, particularly by parties during an election is massively naive. How Twitter responds to it, and whether there was any undue pressure made by those parties would be a scandal, but "VIP account has a direct line to higher ups" is nothing.
Nothing said by parent suggests that they think this wasn't happening on the regular, or by other administrations. The shark was jumped here.
Re: The Twitter Files
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest Question: If the white house contacts Twitter and asks for a tweet to be removed, is that a first amendment violation?
Possibly, but in this story the White House was the one being censored rather than the one asking for a tweet to be removed.
This isn't true. White House requested tweets be removed.
Re: The Twitter Files
#200Politicians should never be able to directly influence the moderation of social media items they find politically unfavorable; I don't care which party does it. I can understand something that involves direct threats/calls to violence, but that's about it. Anyone that has used Twitter for some time knows the moderation was often not all that even, not just by pure political means but also threats of violence etc were…
What if the content is illegally obtained personal material of the politician's civilian family members?