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

Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

melovedata.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 763 posts

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#371

Post by war1025 »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #22

Twitters censorship just serves to further polarize and divide people. As the right bails on twitter and goes to pure conservative echo chambers and the left stays in their leftist echo chambers... any shared interactions are lost. Even though it's their right as a private company...its truly a shame that Twitter is acting like this.

> As the right bails on twitter

For what it's worth, I've stopped commenting on HackerNews because any even moderately pro-Trump opinion is met by the downvote brigade.

In my opinion, interacting with strangers online is just a recipe for a bad time.

I'd cease social media entirely, but I'm not allowed to be social out in the real world anymore, and work is too boring to stay focused for an entire work day.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#372

Post by ganoushoreilly »

guscost wrote: post #189
La1n wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to imply things, it's more useful to the discussion to just say it. Do say the quiet part out loud so people can actually interact with a comment like this.

Sure: Twitter is trying to tip the election in favor of Biden. When the shoe was on the other foot, they never blocked news outlets (no matter how trashy) that promoted anonymous accusations without evidence, or shared illegally-obtained information. The laptop and its contents seem to have been obtained legally in this case, and even if the whole thing reeks of parallel construction, they are not even honestly enfor…

Further, nothing in the story has actually been disputed yet Either. That's where i'm conflicted here. If it were a flat out lie, I'd say go for it, ban it. But as is stands, No one has denied, they've even gone as far as to say they won't deny them. We've had the FBI confirm the laptop. We've had one of the business partner Confirm the contents of the email. We know that multiple investigations are going on State / Federal level. This is news worthy, regardless of what side you're on.

There's 0 chance that they block any negative controversial stories about the Trump campaign or it's related parties.

It's a foolish place to stand your ground, when the outcome is going to be far worse for all sides than if they'd just let it die off naturally. The controversy itself has now given some on the right another reason to double down on their positions. It's divisive by the nature of the action.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#374

Post by babypuncher »

legitster wrote: post #91

What a hot mess. I am imagining those years of looking at terrible National Enquirer headlines at store checkouts. This kind of terrible reporting as always existed, but for some reason (luckily I guess) they never crossed over into national discourse the way that stories do online. I never begrudged the store for carrying them and selling them. If Wal-Mart suddenly felt the need to arbitrate on the accuracy of every…

Seeing those trash magazines at stores always makes me think less of the store owner. At best, they provide no value. At worst, they prey on the under-educated and spread dangerous misinformation.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#375

Post by ganoushoreilly »

koolba wrote: post #187
quacked wrote: post #6

The Post publishes a lot of disreputable trash that's outright false or unproven, but more and more often, it seems that they release primary sources of information (especially videos) much earlier than other news outlets will, if the other news outlets do so at all. There have been multiple times when I've seen an insane video of something happening spreading around Twitter or WorldStar or some other "raw video" agg…

Nothing in your comment says the information is fake or false. In fact, the Biden campaign and his son Hunter have not denied any of the information either. Given that Twitter has allowed people to publish anything and everything about Trump regardless of source (or lack thereof), this is a clear cut case of bias to push their preferred candidate. A different take on the same idea, Google now adds "fact checks" when…

You're allowed free speech as long as its our free speech.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#376

Post by quacked »

symlinkk wrote: post #297
quacked wrote: post #6

The Post publishes a lot of disreputable trash that's outright false or unproven, but more and more often, it seems that they release primary sources of information (especially videos) much earlier than other news outlets will, if the other news outlets do so at all. There have been multiple times when I've seen an insane video of something happening spreading around Twitter or WorldStar or some other "raw video" agg…

A lot of people are missing your point, which is a good one - that big name news outlets rarely ever post raw, unedited videos. This is a shame in my opinion.

Thanks. Personally, I think that access to raw, unedited videos (that more often than not do exist these days) would clear up the majority of modern political controversies. Often, either the truth becomes clear, or the video disqualifies itself as being a source of news.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#377

Post by barumi »

razius wrote: post #277
barumi wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Twitter is like Fedex refusing to deliver your packages (...) In case you don't know, FedEx or pretty much any delivery company are free to refuse shipping your parcels. A cursory googling is enough to allow you to discover fedex's shipping guidelines.

Except those are pretty transparent and non-political.

The only thing that makes Twitter's action as political is that we have a radical segment of the US's population which is hell-bent on supporting a smear campaign against a candidate they feel threatened about even though they are well aware the campaign is based on false or misleading info likely force-fed by a totalitarian regime.

And to make matters worse, this radical group doesn't even care if the information is available or not, they only care about spreading it as far and wide as it's conceivable and attack anyone that they deem reactionary, including social networks that flag posts as having unsubstantiated information.

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#378

Post by [deleted] »

TigeriusKirk wrote: post #317
dragonwriter wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Separately I view Twitter as breaking section 230 free speech regulatory agreements in meddling with what they 'publish' Section 230 was overtly adopted so that platforms would make efforts to censor content that they found to be objectionable; there are no "free speech regulatory agreements" associated with it. It is the only surviving part of a law whose sole and entire purpose was internet censorship, the rest o…

When people say "violating section 230," rather than correcting them it's more instructive to understand what they're trying to communicate. Usually it seems to be they're really saying "this shows section 230 is a bad idea." If we could move past the reflexive "well actually" there's a real issue people feel needs to be addressed.

[deleted]

Re: Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account

#379

Post by jerf »

munk-a wrote: post #170
cjjuice wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should not be the job of the social media companies to be judge and jury for truth. Let the people decide for themselves what is true and false. Basically the social media company argument is... we think people are too dumb to figure out what is "real" or not so we are going to censor. That to me is an extremely damning view of the common person. But then, everywhere on the platform.. "make a plan to vote". So you…

The "common person" is honestly pretty depressing. The common person primarily votes based solely on a historical allegiance to a political party (be it individually formed or inherited) with about 75% of America essentially being unmovable D or R safe votes. Censorship is a hard question and I think we do need to have better laws promoting free access to material (even "libelous" material) but this is also an area w…

'The "common person" is honestly pretty depressing.'

The "common person" is the one doing the moderating on the platforms. There is no pool of superintelligent, superwise, super-everything people doing the hard work of moderating on the platform. It's just common people.

It's not even a good sample of common people. It has a very particular slant to it; very American, for one thing.

Post reply on HN