21–30 of 45 posts
So much for “free speech”. Ever since Musk met with Netanyahu, X has been heavily censoring pro-Palestine content.
Or like being blamed for not supplying but also supplying starlink to Russian territory
So much for “free speech”. Ever since Musk met with Netanyahu, X has been heavily censoring pro-Palestine content.
How come he’s being called antisemite then. Or like being blamed for not supplying but also supplying starlink to Russian territory
Gosh, I wonder if there was some other difference that people were concerned about /s
So much for “free speech”. Ever since Musk met with Netanyahu, X has been heavily censoring pro-Palestine content.
How come he’s being called antisemite then. Or like being blamed for not supplying but also supplying starlink to Russian territory
I would guess this policy is the result of ADL, other pro-Israel lobbying groups, and Israel itself, pressuring social media groups as part of their hasbara operation. And perhaps Elon Musk is a Zionist himself (he's certainly friends with many VCs who are). Miguel de Icaza is a random person to censor. I'm sure it's just a crude, automated policy that goes off the content of the tweet and his account having a large…
> And perhaps Elon Musk is a Zionist himself Not so long ago all the accusation was the he was anti-Semitic. The cognitive dissonance is loud.
Zionism is not Judaism.
So much for “free speech”. Ever since Musk met with Netanyahu, X has been heavily censoring pro-Palestine content.
How come he’s being called antisemite then. Or like being blamed for not supplying but also supplying starlink to Russian territory
Specifically this one:
https://twitter.com/breakingbaht/status/1724892505647296620
This is racist, first because it's close to justifying violence against Jews, because of their religion, because of something a country did. Again, nobody would doubt "muslims deserve to be attacked because of what is happening in Sudan" is extremely racist. This is close to that.
And let's please make one thing clear: physically attacking zionists, or justifying that, because of Gaza is also extremely racist.
Secondly it's accusing "those hordes of minorities that support flooding their country" (ie. muslim immigrants) of being violent racists.
What DOESN'T matter is whether either of these are true behaviors seen in those groups. You're a racist if you say that either attacking Jews because of Israel is valid (obviously) and you're a racist if you say that muslim immigrants (even veiled) are antisemitic as a group.
Saying SPECIFIC Jews are going too far, or SPECIFIC muslim immigrants are a serious piece of racist asshole is not racist.
I saw this earlier today, it was really weird. A pg post showed up in my timeline, so I opened his reply and it said the post to which pg was replying was unavailable [0]. Then I went back and copied the name of the person to which pg replied, and opened his page in order to see both posts [1]. Not really sure about the details, but the lack of transparency around issues of this nature is what bothers me the most. At…
I saw this earlier today, it was really weird. A pg post showed up in my timeline, so I opened his reply and it said the post to which pg was replying was unavailable [0]. Then I went back and copied the name of the person to which pg replied, and opened his page in order to see both posts [1]. Not really sure about the details, but the lack of transparency around issues of this nature is what bothers me the most. At…
Didn’t Twitter supposedly publish the algorithm to let users re-create their feed and notice if Twitter is doing something shady?
“Free speech absolutist”. What a joke.
I'm curious about this premise. Which platform allows free speech with little to no moderation? Could Mastodon be that platform?