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

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#651

Post by [deleted] »

calgarymicro wrote: post #542
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t really see a debate. I see an email listing tweets from “the Biden team” and a response that it’s been taken care of. Must be very cool to be running for president and have a team with a direct censorship line to one of the biggest news proliferation websites in the world. Just lost a few tweets and BAM!

The tweets in question were naked images of Hunter Biden, which were against Twitter's TOS and would be illegal to circulate in California anyway under the state's revenge porn law. You can literally put the links into archive.org and see for yourself if you want. Taibbi's thread also makes clear that Trump's team had access to the same 'direct censorship line', and that some of their requests were honored too.

[deleted]

Re: The Twitter Files

#652

Post by djur »

progrus wrote: post #255
Bilal_io wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter and the US government collude I see everyone saying this while ignoring the timeline. This happened before the 2020 elections. Biden was not president back then.

These actions effectively installed Biden as president. There was a poll where an easily-sufficient percentage of respondents said they would have changed their vote if the laptop story hadn’t been suppressed. Someone can probably find it.

The poll showed that 4 out of 5 people who said they had been following the laptop story (i.e., people who already knew about it despite the "censorship") thought that it was "very" or "somewhat" likely that coverage of the story affected the outcome of the election.

Re: The Twitter Files

#653

Post by cryptonector »

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?

In this case the content was legally obtained.

Re: The Twitter Files

#654

Post by akomtu »

nodesocket wrote: post #606

How come I can't find this story on the front page of: - CNN - CNBC - New York Times - LA Times However, stories about how people are "fleeing" Twitter, Twitter is losing more advertising revenue, and Kanye are readily on the front pages?

CNN and CNBC are like Fanta and Coca-Cola: same junk, same owners, different labels.

Re: The Twitter Files

#655

Post by someNameIG »

sva_ wrote: post #619
_8j50 wrote: post #610

Why is this propaganda bullshit on the front page. I gotta ask about moderation on HN here. This is literally moderation, "the twitter files" my ass. They pretext political contributions and falsley connect legitimate moderation to that. Of course they should have blocked that story and still should. Oh, but get this, it's their platform they get to do what they want. They are not an impartial government agency. In t…

Man, this 2-party system in the US really made some brains rot away, it seems.

We have close to 2 main parties here in Australia too, and I thought our politics could get bad, but Americans seem to take thing to the extreme.

Re: The Twitter Files

#656

Post by kumarvvr »

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?"

I just want to ask you. If you came face to face with a tweet that affects you and is in violation of twitters policies, would you not point them out?

Re: The Twitter Files

#657

Post by kumarvvr »

How can the politics of US have only two parties, is beyond comprehension for me?

Every aspect of US political life is cleanly split into two halves.

Such a mess and totally un-representative of people that vote the govt. to power.

Sure, some may argue that more parties means more chaos, but better there be a 100 small chaotic situations tempered by mutual interest and compromise, rather than two very dangerous chaotic situations with each having enough weight to cause long term damage.

Re: The Twitter Files

#658

Post by papito »

pyinstallwoes wrote: post #502
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 shows collusion with politicians to coordinate censorship.

Here come the big words. "Collusion" sounds borderline criminal. "Censorship" is something a government does, not a private entity. This is not hard.

Re: The Twitter Files

#659

Post by archagon »

mrcwinn wrote: post #303
imnotjames wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean this? https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/2/23490863/elon-musk-twitte...

It posted as I saved. I edited my comment to reflect that, though my point still holds. Calling it "a flop" is consistent with their recent bias (or pandering?) and ignores the substance of the matter almost entirely. Perhaps with some investigatory reporting The Verge could have broken this story themselves a year ago -- "the right way."

Or maybe the point is that there is no substance?

Re: The Twitter Files

#660

Post by kumarvvr »

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…

But so does dark money in politics, which is worse than influencing twitter.

Dark money flows to high impact mass distribution channels, and who knows what is truth and what is not, and the response is social media should not be asked to take down false or misleading content?

Post reply on HN