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

401–410 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#401

Post by nonethewiser »

roenxi wrote: post #262
assttoasstmgr wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people talking about ToS as if it's applied consistently and without bias. Let's assume that the oft-storied "pee tapes" were real, published by a mainstream news outlet and posted to Twitter. Would those same individuals regurgitating ToS violations agree that should receive the same treatment, or would they have been complicit in spreading it as far and wide as possible?

The situation is clouded by the extreme bias of the employees at Twitter. They seemed to believe they were applying the ToS consistently and fairly despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. It was interesting when they banned Trump that they cited "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th." as a notable incitement of violence. Someone who can put that up and think o…

> It was interesting when they banned Trump that they cited "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th." as a notable incitement of violence.

Can anyone square this? It seems indefensible.

Re: The Twitter Files

#403

Post by 1270018080 »

bakugo wrote: post #378
1270018080 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This conspiracy theory validates what you want to be true, is a better way to put it.

How much more proof is needed before you stop calling it a conspiracy theory and start calling it a fact?

A puff piece for a far-right billionaire on what is basically a Truth Social equivalent website means nothing to me. It doesn't register as proof. It's like what your parents share on facebook, or the schizophrenic guy on the subway yelling nonsense into the air. There's no point.

Re: The Twitter Files

#404

Post by rhaksw »

MBCook wrote: post #393

There is another way to look at this. So Elon posted today he would drop important inside info about the Hunter Biden story the right wing loves so much. And they seemed thrilled and are now debating the “new” info. That’s an interesting turn from yesterday when that same group was pissed at him for going back on his free speech/no censorship claims when he kicked Kanye off. How surprisingly lucky for him he did some…

> This seems like nothing more than a big redirection to get people to move on from the last story.

I find government comms with social media to be interesting. Do you not? I'm not sure if there's a bombshell there or not. I believe all public servants since Nixon understand about their actions being reviewable. Not that they shouldn't be able to have private conversations, of course. That's a whole 'nother issue.

Re: The Twitter Files

#405

Post by nathanaldensr »

romellem wrote: post #296
Dig1t wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064 Biden team asking Twitter to "handle" tweets they don't like. This rubs me the wrong way, nobody in government should be telling Twitter to remove speech.

Did you read your own source? The Biden team never asked Twitter staff to “handle” anything. They forwarded tweets that [violated twitter’s ToS][1], a Twitter staff member forwarded them for review, and at that point the reviewer said they “handled these.” That’s what content moderation is supposed to do! [1]: https://twitter.com/parkebench/status/1598841731763810304

Luckily, Americans' Constitutional rights are not so easily dismissed by such charitable explanations.

Thank God.

Re: The Twitter Files

#406

Post by fwip »

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…

They have a direct line to get things reviewed - not removed.

I'll bet most big corporations advertising on Twitter have one too.

Re: The Twitter Files

#407

Post by Kreutzer »

slickdork wrote: post #41

Anyone have the 'long form' of this to read? Twitter is such a terrible way to read long content. Aside: I really enjoyed Taibbi's few books, but haven't respected his online opinions since around 2016. I'm not surprised Elon chose Taibbi to 'break this story' considering what 'side' Taibbi's been on -- he's had a pretty clear bias, but I'm willing to check out more of his reporting here in long form.

Yeah I think twitter started rotting Taibbi's synapses around that time. He's become so hyper-concerned with the hypocrisy of liberals that he's not even aware how he's just become a gullible parrot for right-wing spew. Sorry but I’m done with all this fake moral outrage about a laptop or whatever.

Re: The Twitter Files

#408

Post by bavell »

paulgb wrote: post #227
Dig1t wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This one is pretty bad in my opinion: https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064 The government is not supposed to be censoring people's speech, however they are effectively doing just that using a layer of indirection.

Joe Biden wasn’t “the government” yet, look at the date. I wish we knew what these tweets actually were. If it was suppressing a news story, that’s bad. If it’s asking for death threats to be removed, that’s not bad. (Matt himself acknowledges that both parties had tweets taken down, his evidence for bias is apparently that Twitter employees donated more to democrats https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/159882893239597…

Wow, 99.7% contributions went to democrats... If that isn't damning evidence of partisan bias I don't know what is! I honestly wasn't expecting it to be that one-sided.

Re: The Twitter Files

#409

Post by cplusplusfellow »

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…

Yes but only for some White House admins.

The previous White House admin saw their press secretary’s account suspended because the campaign didn’t like the fact that she tweeted about this story.

The current White House likely wouldn’t see that same fate.

Re: The Twitter Files

#410

Post by StanislavPetrov »

mikkergp wrote: post #362
StanislavPetrov wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When moderation policies (or laws) are subjectively and arbitrarily enforced based on the identity of the party being persecuted, it ceases to be a policy and is simply another tool used to bludgeon those who are disfavored. It was a big story in September of 2020 when the NYT published Trump's hacked/leaked tax returns - a story that did not receive the Hunter Biden treatment, but was amplified all across Twitter. H…

>It is stunning to me that so many otherwise intelligent people do not see the problem with big tech colluding with government officials and intelligence agencies to brazenly attempt to distort and censor public discourse - especially right before an election. You took a giant leap from maybe people at Twitter were acting with bias. You’d need a lot more information to justify this assertion, and who is saying this w…

>You took a giant leap from maybe people at Twitter were acting with bias. You’d need a lot more information to justify this assertion

A bipartisan group of 50 CIA agents and various spooks released a letter falsely labeling the Hunter Biden laptop "Russian disinformation" at the exact same time the story was being censored by Facebook and Twitter at the behest of the Biden campaign. It is unfortunate that so many are willing (and able) to willfully delude themselves into denying reality.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-...

>Hang them all, put social media in the hands of the government, ban moderation?

If Twitter had unilaterally decided to act as political partisans without direction from political campaigns, elected officials and intelligence agencies it would be an entirely different issue - this isn't the case as clearly illustrated by part one of the Taibbi series. I have little doubt when it comes to the Covid chapter you will see even more direct censorship coordination between Twitter and government officials, which will also be downplayed (if not supported) by those who believe it was "good" or "necessary". The fact is that The Constitution is the foundational document of our country. It isn't some sort of optional set of guidelines that can be ignored when inconvenient. The 1st Amendment is the most important part of this foundational document, the bedrock of a free society. All of our elected leaders, including the president, swear an oath of office to protect and uphold The Constitution. The legitimate authority of the government is derived from The Constitution. A government acting outside of the Constitution is not a legitimate government.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Post reply on HN