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

551–560 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#551

Post by partiallypro »

greenthrow wrote: post #200
partiallypro wrote: post #103

Politicians should never be able to directly influence the moderation of social media items they find politically unfavorable; I don't care which party does it. I can understand something that involves direct threats/calls to violence, but that's about it. Anyone that has used Twitter for some time knows the moderation was often not all that even, not just by pure political means but also threats of violence etc were…

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

Twitter never shut down Wikileaks or other things in the interest of national security that involved civilians and government officials alike. They have allowed journalists to leak other similar stories from hacks constantly. The Panama Papers, etc were all mostly civilians. Twitter never censored that, except in China at the behest of the CCP. Which comes to the original point. No politician or political arm should have the power or influence to take something down they find unfavorable. I prefer not to live in a CCP like state where the "party" gets an edit button on everyone's thoughts.

Re: The Twitter Files

#552

Post by AlbertCory »

zephrx1111 wrote: post #510
AlbertCory wrote: post #292

The three phases of denial: 1) It's not true 2) It's true, but it's not important 3) It's true and it's important, but we already knew it

So far this is the only comment makes sense.

Thank you, sir. Many of the anti-Musk comments are either (2) or (3).

Re: The Twitter Files

#553

Post by RonaldRaygun »

MacsHeadroom wrote: post #443
romellem wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

"Will no one rid me of these meddlesome Tweets?"

Will no one rid me of this meddlesome Pence?

Re: The Twitter Files

#554

Post by degobah »

oxff wrote: post #548
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…

> It is not a big deal. You would be literally fuming about how Fascists Are Hanging Democracy From The Rope if Biden and Trump was switched in this case. So would most "it is not a big deal it happened, but it would have been big deal if it didn't". Friend-Enemy is all it is.

What did the Biden campaign do that the Trump White House did not?

"In 2020, requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign were received and honored."

The difference is that the Trump White House was the executive office of the federal govt making requests, while Biden was a private citizen.

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598828932395978752

Re: The Twitter Files

#555

Post by zaroth »

anoonmoose wrote: post #130
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.

1- Biden wasn't in government, he was running for office. Private citizen at the time. 2- They weren't telling, they were asking, and if Twitter feels like they were told, they can sue the government for violating their First Amendment rights.

The point isn’t that Twitter felt compelled. Isn’t the point that Twitter happily complied, and even made up reasons to censor the stuff they thought was the most damaging “in order to prevent another 2016”.

Re: The Twitter Files

#557

Post by sanderjd »

rhaksw wrote: post #404
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.

What "government comms" were exposed here, specifically? The specific claims seem to be about comms with private, albeit political, entities.

Re: The Twitter Files

#558

Post by oxff »

degobah wrote: post #554
oxff wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is not a big deal. You would be literally fuming about how Fascists Are Hanging Democracy From The Rope if Biden and Trump was switched in this case. So would most "it is not a big deal it happened, but it would have been big deal if it didn't". Friend-Enemy is all it is.

What did the Biden campaign do that the Trump White House did not? "In 2020, requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign were received and honored." The difference is that the Trump White House was the executive office of the federal govt making requests, while Biden was a private citizen. https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598828932395978752

This is quite obviously about substantial influence on election news cycle; and of course pointing the finger at the other side is already contained in the friend-enemy distinction.

Re: The Twitter Files

#559

Post by braingenious »

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…

>And yet here, silence so far.

What new information would you, as a journalist, find salient and worthy of a brand new post today?

Re: The Twitter Files

#560

Post by romellem »

mc32 wrote: post #527
romellem wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Quoted post unavailable.

> I wonder if … they self-reported their own ToS violations.

Sorry, what “own violations?”

And the original sarcasm: you are upset that an employee is reporting violating content that concerns their employer? I didn’t realize that if you click the report button on the post, you must have 10 degrees of separation from it, otherwise it’s untoward.

Are you aware of how almost all content moderation on the public-facing web works?

And wait, “throughout the whole internet”? I missed the part when Twitter became the sole TLD and its vast expanse meant any violating content found must surely have been discovered by time-consuming and pain-staking methods. Or maybe a reverse image search and a few interns can find some violating content that hadn’t been flagged yet on one single website.

Enough with the indignation and false accusations.

Post reply on HN