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

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#311

Post by jackmott »

dmitrygr wrote: post #277
mikkergp wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

No post body was provided.

Re: The Twitter Files

#312

Post by ransom1538 »

dekhn wrote: post #66

It's still kind of odd to think that you can be an in-favor executive at a company, then somebody else can buy your company, fire you, and go back and read all your work emails (many of which would be extremely sensitive) and share it with journalists who then screenshot it and share it with the world on the same platform that employed you! This was always a possibility (and a probability- my friend was a lawyer who…

Use privnote it takes 4 seconds.

Re: The Twitter Files

#313

Post by belltaco »

chroma wrote: post #252
Bilal_io wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter and the US government collude I see everyone saying this while ignoring the timeline. This happened before the 2020 elections. Biden was not president back then.

Biden himself wasn't an elected official at the time, but many others were. One of Taibbi's tweets shows an email from the DNC requesting that certain tweets be censored.

DNC is a private organization.

Re: The Twitter Files

#314

Post by myko »

chroma wrote: post #172
dekhn wrote: post #66

It's still kind of odd to think that you can be an in-favor executive at a company, then somebody else can buy your company, fire you, and go back and read all your work emails (many of which would be extremely sensitive) and share it with journalists who then screenshot it and share it with the world on the same platform that employed you! This was always a possibility (and a probability- my friend was a lawyer who…

Because of laws passed after the Enron scandal, publicly traded companies are required to retain internal communications for long periods of time. So if you're going to blame anyone for this, blame the government. Also the owners of Twitter knew that Musk would have access to these messages. That was priced into the deal. Executives and managers at publicly traded companies are very aware of information retention pol…

> If you truly believe that there's no clear evidence, then I don't know what to tell you. Taibbi shows emails where Twitter and the US government collude to censor true information that people wanted to read. That is a big deal.

in this case the government was run by donald trump, and the censorship was to remove stolen revenge porn

Re: The Twitter Files

#315

Post by grecy »

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.

> 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

Of course mainstream TV and print "news" has been doing this for decades, but for some strange reason people assume they're somehow "better".

I personally think it's great all this is coming out, because it shows how dangerous and manipulative large media (in all forms) really is.

Re: The Twitter Files

#316

Post by mjmsmith »

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…

Most concerning thing here is people like Taibbi and Greenwald turning into boomer cranks. I had higher hopes for the xers.

Re: The Twitter Files

#317

Post by bko »

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…

The 1st amendment has long been interpreted to apply to the entire federal government.

> The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. It prohibits any laws that establish a national religion, impede the free exercise of religion, abridge the freedom of speech, infringe upon the freedom of the press, interfere with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibit citizens from petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted into the Bill of Rights in 1791. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment

Re: The Twitter Files

#318

Post by myko »

progrus wrote: post #255
Bilal_io wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter and the US government collude I see everyone saying this while ignoring the timeline. This happened before the 2020 elections. Biden was not president back then.

These actions effectively installed Biden as president. There was a poll where an easily-sufficient percentage of respondents said they would have changed their vote if the laptop story hadn’t been suppressed. Someone can probably find it.

> These actions effectively installed Biden as president.

No, the millions of voters who selected him over trump did that.

This hit job using hacked iCloud information to post revenge porn of Hunter Biden was not going to change people's votes, it had nothing to do with Joe Biden. Just another Russian hack job.

Re: The Twitter Files

#319

Post by [deleted] »

andreyk wrote: post #108

It does not seem like this really exposed any new information - Twitter publicly justified its actions as being about its hacked data policy back when this all happened ( https://www.nationalreview.com/news/twitter-cites-hacked-mat... ). All this shows is some internal disagreement as to whether that was the right call. By the way, Facebook also suppressed the news story citing its misinformation policy ( https://www…

[deleted]

Re: The Twitter Files

#320

Post by myko »

Amezarak wrote: post #260
greenthrow wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if the content is illegally obtained personal material of the politician's civilian family members?

Quoted post unavailable.

> situations involving prostitutes (sometimes underage)

This is a lie, you should reconsider consuming information from wherever you picked this "fact" up.

Post reply on HN