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

Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#461

Post by Jestar342 »

partiallypro wrote: post #333

Twitter is well within the rights to do this, but I have seen tweets from blue check marks essentially calling for violence and Twitter didn't remove them. So, does that mean Twitter actually -supports- those view points now? If Twitter is going to police people, it needs to be across the board. Otherwise it's just a weird censorship that is targeting one person and can easily be seen as political. Everyone is applau…

Erm, what? This is just not true, and is a false dichotomy. Moderation is hard. Always has been. Stuff will slip through the cracks.

POTUS has the most popular (and currently most controversial - note, that's _controversial_ not _extreme_ or some other morph) so it's easy to see why Twitter are on top of it. Other blue-checked accounts, whilst more "important" than unverified, just simply don't compare to the importance and prevalance of POTUS' account.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#462

Post by AnthonyMouse »

jcranmer wrote: post #403
dfxm12 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, Trump, the guy who had a platform plank complaining about his predecessors' use of executive orders as "power grabs" [0], actually issued an executive order about Twitter's TOS ? 0 - https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-10-19/trump-...

Don't worry... he also criticized Obama for golfing too much, and has gone golfing more frequently than Obama. And Senate Republicans have openly asked judges to resign so they can be replaced by conservative judges, and their justification for why it's okay to do this so close to an election but it wasn't okay to confirm Garland so close to an election literally amounts to "Obama's a Democrat, Trump's a Republican."

To be fair, the judges asked to resign (really retire) are conservatives. It's the same reason Ginsburg hasn't retired despite her health issues -- everything to do with which party would be nominating her replacement.

The next time the Democrats control the Senate and the Republicans the whitehouse, I wouldn't expect them be interested in confirming any judges right before a Presidential election either.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#463

Post by ta1234567890 »

partiallypro wrote: post #333

Twitter is well within the rights to do this, but I have seen tweets from blue check marks essentially calling for violence and Twitter didn't remove them. So, does that mean Twitter actually -supports- those view points now? If Twitter is going to police people, it needs to be across the board. Otherwise it's just a weird censorship that is targeting one person and can easily be seen as political. Everyone is applau…

You are technically correct, however the same logic applies to every type of enforcement.

Ideally the enforcement of every rule should apply to everyone equally, but in practice we see the police behave differently towards different people, we see tax audits and penalties applied mostly to people without the means to defend themselves and we see how apparently the law and government rules don't even apply to Trump. The world still goes on and we somehow deal with all of this.

Twitter enforcing their own rules is just going to be more of the same.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#464

Post by onlyamuslimguy »

mthoms wrote: post #345
gowld wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's amazing. Of all the horrific thing people post to Twitter all day long, a vague statement about Palestinian independence is the "best" whataboutist comparison Trump could find to match his own threat to open fire on the country he is sworn to defend.

I don't think the Khomenni tweet is a valid comparison to Trumps (for other reasons) but lets be honest — This tweet is anything but a "vague statement about Palestinian independence", since it directly references and advocates for Jihad and Martyrdom.

but "jihad" and "martyrdom" are the same things we talk about when we pump up our soldiers to fight in our wars. what's the difference between that and how we talk in the US about what an honor it is to lay one's life down for his country?

every country and every army in the world tells it's soldiers that sacrificing their lives for the sake of the war they are fighting is honorable and noble and that their families, friends, and nations are proud of them for doing so. how is that so much different than telling soldiers they will be rewarded in heaven for being martyrs? For those who are religious, if you sacrifice your life for the greater good (for the good side in a war between good and evil), isn't that a good deed? and don't good deeds get you into heaven?

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#466

Post by riffic »

lykahb wrote: post #351

The neutral companies, such as utilities, online hosting or financial providers serve nearly everyone with little objections - they defer to the law rather than any internal policies. The more selective companies such as newspapers and TV channels are expected to restrict who can get published. By representing itself both as an open platform and as a company with progressive values, Twitter has put itself into an awk…

Twitter has never been a "Utility" in the way that you may be imagining it to be.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#467

Post by rhegart »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #140
slg wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is using past violence as a threat of imminent violence while the other accounts you mentioned will generally reference violence indirectly or in the past tense. That is an important distinction.

He is the commander in chief. He has the capability to threaten violence. This tweet, while in bad taste IMO, was a threat to those who are planning to continue looting and burning buildings in Minneapolis. I’m not sure if you’ve seen the videos, but there are full scale riots. Rioters completely looted a Target and burned it nearly to the ground. Is “shooting” the answer to that? Probably not. And hopefully the Nati…

Target is minor, they blew up a police station. That’s terrorism level attack. Police should have had control of the situation, they allowed it to happen

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#468

Post by conanbatt »

QuercusMax wrote: post #382
lykahb wrote: post #351

The neutral companies, such as utilities, online hosting or financial providers serve nearly everyone with little objections - they defer to the law rather than any internal policies. The more selective companies such as newspapers and TV channels are expected to restrict who can get published. By representing itself both as an open platform and as a company with progressive values, Twitter has put itself into an awk…

Fact-checking obvious lies is a "progressive value"? Wow, that really shows how bad things have gotten.

By choosing what to fact-check you can make any agenda. In practical terms there really isn't an "objective truth discoverable by journalism".

I'm pro slander tho, twitter should be able to pin a tweet in every account saying trump has small hands. Americans in general don't see how great chicanery is for a country.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#469

Post by vharuck »

koheripbal wrote: post #370
kingnight wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The valley being an echo chamber doesn’t necessarily mean those implementing this have their heads in the sand. It can’t be all perfectly achieved, but to do nothing, as they were before, could be now determined to be a worse case than providing these annotations to flagrant misuse by the highest impact profile that they can’t do away with entirely.

The legal issue is that their legal protection from defamation and libel under section 230 requires them to moderate "in good faith". If they only selective moderate accounts, then that protection may not survive in court. ...but I think a greater concern we can all agree on, is that for the type of communications that Twitter does - Twitter is effectively a monopoly. The people being censored here can't even themsel…

>The people being censored here can't even themselves go to any alternative platform, because there's really no other platform at that scale for that content format.

What about setting up a blog on whitehouse.com? Most normal people can't get the same audience, but Trump's not normal.

>If they only selective moderate accounts, then that protection may not survive in court.

Even assuming there was a service moderating by purely political guidelines, I don't see how 230 would stop applying. Otherwise, a lot of websites will be screwed. For instance, any website run by a political party that allows comments.

>that's a bigger problem, because it gives Twitter the power to shape global communications unilaterally. Something no corporation should have the power to do.

The solution to a monopoly abusing its power isn't to write piecemeal law curtailing things as they come up. The solution is to get rid of the monopoly (breaking it up, making it so competitors join the market, etc).

But this order isn't about monopolies. It's a party plank and rallying cry.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#470

Post by misiti3780 »

adamch wrote: post #384
misiti3780 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about this one: https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1086927762634399744?...

You could say requesting dox is a form of violence. But it's a lot less violent than ordering the military to shoot people. It's reasonable that a policy of removing tweets that glorify violence would catch one but not the other.

agreed, im not saying this is equal to trump, but i don't think anyone here downvoting me would want to be doxed by someone with 2.1 million followers, regardless of if she is a comedian or not.
Post reply on HN