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

751–760 of 1001 posts

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

#751

Post by dlp211 »

buzzerbetrayed wrote: post #718
ssorc3 wrote: post #695

So I have a question about this. Does free speech apply to platforms like Facebook and Twitter? I would have thought that a website owner has a choice about the content of their website, even if that content is user generated. Surely they could remove any tweet they wanted and not be sued?

It depends. And the problem that people have is that social media companies want to be both publishers and platforms. For example, T-Mobile is a platform. They aren't responsible for anything you say when on the phone, using their network. CNN is a publisher. They are responsible for anything that gets posted on their website, and can get sued accordingly. Social media companies want to choose what is posted on their…

> CNN is a publisher. They are responsible for anything that gets posted on their website, and can get sued accordingly.

This isn't true though. CNN/NYTimes/etc can't be sued for 3rd party comments on their site. CNN is also allowed to filter what comments make it on their site. These are not opposing ideas.

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

#752

Post by dependenttypes »

ikeyany wrote: post #192

People are wondering "How far does this go? How can Twitter say this is not cool, but allow something like violent movies or games? Where's the line?" The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line.

> The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line.

Is this supposed to be bad? I actually wish that our own PM had done the same. I am sure that the citizens of a lot of countries that live under the rule of criminal syndicates, looters, and highwaymen would agree.

It seems that the US citizens are fine with state mandated violence as long as it does not include them. Nothing happened regarding https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21018041 for example.

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

#753

Post by [deleted] »

coopsmgoops wrote: post #520
disease wrote: post #516

For everyone bashing Twitter's actions, including the President, why don't they just leave the platform for Gab or something else?

I don't quite understand the "if you don't like it leave" theory. Is it really so unreasonable for people to want to influence the way the established platform works rather than switch and be alone on a new platform. Nobody is going to bother coming with you to Gab.

[deleted]

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

#754

Post by elliekelly »

buzzerbetrayed wrote: post #718
ssorc3 wrote: post #695

So I have a question about this. Does free speech apply to platforms like Facebook and Twitter? I would have thought that a website owner has a choice about the content of their website, even if that content is user generated. Surely they could remove any tweet they wanted and not be sued?

It depends. And the problem that people have is that social media companies want to be both publishers and platforms. For example, T-Mobile is a platform. They aren't responsible for anything you say when on the phone, using their network. CNN is a publisher. They are responsible for anything that gets posted on their website, and can get sued accordingly. Social media companies want to choose what is posted on their…

The "publisher" vs "platform" debate is a false dichotomy without any basis in the actual law. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive under Section 230. A newspaper is responsible for the content they "publish" but if I comment on one of their articles they are not responsible for what I've said on their "platform".

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

#755

Post by beerandt »

druddha wrote: post #605
Simulacra wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because suspending Spike Lee would have required someone at Twitter to make that decision, and they're not going to do that. But will leap at the chance for Trump. It's been a clear double standard for years.

If they were going to "leap at the chance" to suspend Trump, then why haven't they already? He's been treading in the grey area of their ToS for years.

Conflicting interests between how much they disagree with him politically and how much money they directly make off of his traffic (and less directly via traffic from everyone complaining about the controversy).

Twitter's business model is totally reliant on controversy. They want to treat/control, but not cure/extinguish.

Which is a separate reason that twitter's ethically conflicted in making almost any judgment calls on what's "allowable" speech.

Additionally, the nature of mud-slinging politics requires that ones opponents "follow" his online presence in able to attack. So if Trump leaves Twitter, not only do his followers go to whatever new platform he does, but so must his adversaries.

Twitter doesn't want that.

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

#756

Post by ardy42 »

buzzerbetrayed wrote: post #718
ssorc3 wrote: post #695

So I have a question about this. Does free speech apply to platforms like Facebook and Twitter? I would have thought that a website owner has a choice about the content of their website, even if that content is user generated. Surely they could remove any tweet they wanted and not be sued?

It depends. And the problem that people have is that social media companies want to be both publishers and platforms. For example, T-Mobile is a platform. They aren't responsible for anything you say when on the phone, using their network. CNN is a publisher. They are responsible for anything that gets posted on their website, and can get sued accordingly. Social media companies want to choose what is posted on their…

> It depends. And the problem that people have is that social media companies want to be both publishers and platforms.

> For example, T-Mobile is a platform. They aren't responsible for anything you say when on the phone, using their network.

> CNN is a publisher. They are responsible for anything that gets posted on their website, and can get sued accordingly.

Also T-Mobile is a point-to-point communications platform, while CNN is a broadcaster.

Social media seems like a new thing that doesn't have directly analogous antecedents. It's a high-impact, wide-reach broadcaster that has little to no editorial control. Before it, broadcasters lacking editorial control were marginal and low-reach.

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

#758

Post by corrupt_measure »

Except it wasn't glorifying violence. Like at all. He was not saying that if looting continues then police would start shooting, that's a twisted and strained interpretation.

He was stating simply that looting begets violence, meaning that the looting must be stopped before things become more violent. It is a call to action to those who appear content to let the looting run rampant as if it's somehow OK or justified.

In such an escalation both protestors and counter protestors would be shooting, so bringing the situation under control quickly is in the best interest of the protestors and the community as a whole.

It is a clear example of the dangers of allowing Twitter to moderate when such an egregiously bad interpretation of Trump's tweet triggers moderation.

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

#759

Post by anigbrowl »

downerending wrote: post #710
onemoresoop wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Radicalism and inciting to violence should be bubbled not amplified.

Unfortunately, you're bubbling away people who believe in free speech and free thought as well, and there are probably a lot more of those. edit: Adding a bit more, the people being bubbled away will likely tend to just isolate. You might think you like that idea, but having spent some time in isolation, I will attest that it kind of messes with your head. You lose your "phase lock" with society on a lot of different…

Anyone who feels like they're in a filter bubble can easily make another Twitter account to explore different perspectives.

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

#760

Post by ausjke »

so now twitter decides what is right or wrong? let's shot down this little evil bird.

the media is so biased these days, their job really should be fair and balance and they totally failed, either too left or two right.

social media polarized people more than anything we have seen in history, thanks to facebook, twitter, and google to some extent

Post reply on HN