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

The Twitter Files

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#271

Post by mrcwinn »

It's pretty odd that the Verge and Platformer have had wall to wall coverage of every moment of Twitter the past few weeks, including live-tweeting content sourced from (perhaps appropriately) disgruntled ex-employees. And yet here, silence so far.

It goes to show what we already knew. Every media outlet (or blogger, or influencer) has an audience, caters to that audience, grows that audience, monetizes that audience.

Sometimes it's hard to tell if The Verge employs high-minded journalists, or just wants to hock a Z Fold 4 referral link in time for Christmas. Perhaps subscriptions will save us all, but then if your audience is more Twitter employees than Twitter owners, you'll certainly tend to bias your coverage accordingly.

It seems business model is not the solution alone. I think all we can hope for is diversity and choice. I just hope quality can work its way through the algorithm.

[Edit: The Verge did just post their first article on this just now, calling it "a flop."]

Re: The Twitter Files

#272

Post by darth_avocado »

Dem_Boys wrote: post #127

Most 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…

Are we going to pretend the same lines don’t exist to old school television channels, newspapers and radio stations?

Re: The Twitter Files

#273

Post by Karunamon »

mikece wrote: post #241
Dem_Boys wrote: post #169

Earlier 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?

No. The 1st Amendment is a restriction on the Legislative branch: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Congress passed no laws in this regard. Whether or not this was illegal activit…

I don't think it's quite that simple. For instance, the establishment of religion clause has been read to deny public entities the ability to put up Christmas displays, despite no "laws" being passed to facilitate them.

The government "asking" a private entity to take some action is inherently coercive due to the power imbalance.

Re: The Twitter Files

#274

Post by we_never_see_it »

lapcat wrote: post #189

The worst part of this censorship was the pure stupidity of trying to censor links to a website that was always available independently of Twitter and Facebook. If someone wanted to read the story, they could always go to the original source, the NY Post. It's just impossible to keep it a secret, and that's why the censorship attempt was an utter failure, predictably so. Failure was inevitable in this case. Twitter c…

I don't think it's about removing access per se. It is more about making the story radioactive to Dem voterbase - (upper-)middle class suburban white collar demographic. To ensure that their loyal voterbase stays loyal.

Same thing happened with Andrew Cuomo. It was an elaborate play designed to make Dem voterbase to believe how amazing Dems are at handling COVID. Meanwhile dilligent citizens knew what Cuomo had done with the nrusing homes. The moment Biden took office Cuomo was thrown under bus because Dems knew due to his nursing home scandal he has become a liability. The longer he stays in the office the more it'll draw attention to Dems' creafully written PR plot.

Re: The Twitter Files

#275

Post by remarkEon »

mdasen wrote: post #259

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-mus... It seems like this is basically coming from Elon Musk through someone he chose. What you’re about to read is the first installment in a series, based upon thousands of internal documents obtained by sources at Twitter Is Elon Musk now "sources at Twitter"? There might be some interesting bits in here, but I think it's important to note that this is Musk…

Not every story is about Elon Musk's ego.

This story is about political operatives influencing what social media companies allow on their platform.

Re: The Twitter Files

#276

Post by imnotjames »

mrcwinn wrote: post #271

It's pretty odd that the Verge and Platformer have had wall to wall coverage of every moment of Twitter the past few weeks, including live-tweeting content sourced from (perhaps appropriately) disgruntled ex-employees. And yet here, silence so far. It goes to show what we already knew. Every media outlet (or blogger, or influencer) has an audience, caters to that audience, grows that audience, monetizes that audience…

You mean this?

https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/2/23490863/elon-musk-twitte...

Re: The Twitter Files

#277

Post by dmitrygr »

mikkergp wrote: post #229
lapcat wrote: post #189

The worst part of this censorship was the pure stupidity of trying to censor links to a website that was always available independently of Twitter and Facebook. If someone wanted to read the story, they could always go to the original source, the NY Post. It's just impossible to keep it a secret, and that's why the censorship attempt was an utter failure, predictably so. Failure was inevitable in this case. Twitter c…

But your point is the point as to why it’s not hubris! they weren’t trying to censor anything, they were just trying to follow their own moderation policies. This I think is why the censorship story is such a non issue, because Twitter is not an exclusive source of this information.

Did you read the OP? Even their CEO questioned of this was proper application of the policy. Their top legal dude admitted that they had been wrong but advised to stay the course. It was NEVER about the policy, except as a justification. They literally admit so multiple times...

Re: The Twitter Files

#278

Post by iambateman »

mikece wrote: post #241
Dem_Boys wrote: post #169

Earlier 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?

No. The 1st Amendment is a restriction on the Legislative branch: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Congress passed no laws in this regard. Whether or not this was illegal activit…

This is basically just wrong.

The executive branch can violate the first amendment…

Re: The Twitter Files

#279

Post by afavour »

BurningFrog wrote: post #266
afavour wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the more division they create, and the more moderates and people on the [opposite side] grow to resent them This feels like a universal to me that applies to both parties. And I’m sorry, “authoritarian suppression of speech and ideas” is pure propaganda. No mainstream left leaning politician is actually perusing such an idea, it’s a boogeyman created by the right and by the looks of things it’s working great.

It's very common on the left to demand suppression of "hate speech". Of course, that commonly ends up mostly meaning "speech I hate".

You’ve made a very vague statement there.

There are extremes in every political movement, no doubt. I don’t deny that there are people on the left out there protesting against “hate speech”. There are also people on the right that are out and out racist. I think choosing whether to vote Democrat or Republican based on either of those extremes is a poor choice.

OP said:

> I would have identified as a Democrat on pretty much every issue, but this authoritarian suppression

So we’re not talking about vague “leftists” here, we’re specifically talking about the Democratic Party. You’re going to have a rough time arguing they are campaigning on authoritarianism.

Re: The Twitter Files

#280

Post by Aeolun »

noah_buddy wrote: post #146
Dem_Boys wrote: post #127

Most 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…

It’s blowing my mind to see people on Twitter reading the story and thinking this is an issue of whether or not Hunter Biden is a problem. This is clearly the much more pernicious issue that 1. social media companies are massively influencing the dissemination of information on an ad hoc basis informed by personal political whims and 2. even the leaders of these organizations are unable to rein in these influences.

So in a way Elon taking over is good. At least it’s abundantly clear the whole platform is run based on his personal whims now.
Post reply on HN