I’ve been trying to read these Twitter files threads thoughtfully, and maybe it’s just a sign of the current average level of comfort with government involvement with social media platforms, but I’m generally not seeing much issue with the stuff being revealed. the worst thing about this particular thread seems like the govt agencies talking to Twitter about foreign influence are overreaching a bit (eg asking them to…
Yeah, these people are just desperately trying to generate outrage over nothing. It’s really really dumb. No need to give them too much thought
The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
61–70 of 491 posts
Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#62I didn’t notice the author, almost took this in good faith, then I got to this banger: > After all, a whole range of government agencies discredit themselves in the #TwitterFiles these people are delusional
Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, these people are just desperately trying to generate outrage over nothing. It’s really really dumb. No need to give them too much thought
[flagged]
I have no agenda or allegiances.
I tried reading them closely. I see some new stuff that is of mild concern given our post-Snowden world, but I am also not able to see the great outrage.
Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#64Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, these people are just desperately trying to generate outrage over nothing. It’s really really dumb. No need to give them too much thought
[flagged]
I've seen a lot of hyperbole about the twitter files that, when I read it for myself, is not nearly what was claimed by the hyperbolist. For example, someone said "The FBI bribed Twitter with $3.4M to remove content!" - I looked into it, and the FBI compensated Twitter for work done over time to research and then take action on suspicious accounts. Now, that may be shady to work with the FBI on takedowns without a warrant or court order. But do I call that a bribe? Not really.
I am open to discussing what is wrong and suspicious in the files, but there is quite a correlation between "people raising hell about the Twitter files" and "people who have no problem with hate speech or adversary nation-state propaganda on social networks".
For example, I believe that actions taken by social networks (or any organization ever) on behalf of the government should be documented and released to the public after some period of time, even on the order of years. If the government believes a twitter account, facebook account or email address is a threat to national security, it should be documented. If the account is not a singular "threat" but is known to the IC to be a nation-state troll, that should be documented as the reason. I'm not convinced it should happen over email.
That said, I acknowledge that nation-state trolling and disinformation campaigns absolutely exist on Twitter and elsewhere, and need dealt with.
Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#66Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#67You can downplay this all you want - but remember: stuff like this is a microcosm of a larger issue. Sections of your government worked directly with Twitter to control what information you saw. Much bigger organizations - Facebook comes to mind - must be doing the same thing every.single.day. And no one finds this even a little bit alarming?
A lot of people completely agree with heavy-handed information control.
Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. What are the intelligence agencies supposed to do if not exactly what is being “revealed”? Are they not allowed to talk to private companies or citizens? If it was being revealed that they were making demands and forcing companies to do things that would be a serious issue. Instead they are asking, nicely, and even paying them for their time and work.
The distinction between the government "asking nicely" and "making demands" is not strong enough. In theory could Twitter could have resisted but the costs would have been quite high. The government should be prohibited from making such requests. It's also apparent that regarding the Hunter Biden story the FBI outright lied in order to make web platforms censor the story.
Really? Companies do this all of the time. For example, how many billions did Apple lose for resisting the FBI’s requests with the San Bernardino shooter?
> It's also apparent that regarding the Hunter Biden story the FBI outright lied in order to make web platforms censor the story.
Can you be specific about this? The “Twitter Files” and all extent accounts say the opposite – and that was the best the right-wing media could find – and if you’re thinking about Zuckerberg’s interview, he specifically said the FBI did not make a request in this case.
Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> "these are Russian disinfo, eradicate them" The actual wording, of course, was this sort of thing: "FBI San Francisco is notifying you of the below accounts which may potentially constitute violations of Twitter's Terms of Service for any action or inaction deemed appropriate within Twitter policy..." ( https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-employees-notified-twit... )
Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter
#70[flagged]
That's the Constitutional definition of treason in the United States.
Who's levying war against the United States here?