751–760 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's different because it was written by a major American newspaper. Twitter should not be exercising editorial control over the news.
Isn't it distribution control rather than editorial control?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The New York Post is not a serious newspaper; it is a sensationalist tabloid. Sometimes the NYPost will report on real news, but I believe absolutely nothing they report until it is verified by the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, or other major broadcast outlet with actual journalistic standards.
None of them are serious. NY Times made a big deal out of trumps taxes when everyone knows depreciation offsets revenue in real estate, its 101 stuff. You get taxed when you sell the asset which happens infrequently but in large magnitude. Most people in the industry were laughing at the gaslighting they did on that story but they fooled their little pawn readers. Just one example out of many. Every news source is fu…
Tax accounting is completely different to accounting you show to a bank for a loan. This is normal because they are used for different things, and are accounting for different things. For example - the tax rate and taxes paid have a real impact on cashflows which would impact your eligibility for a loan. In tax returns taxes paid are not included in profit and loss, because that would lower the tax paid by businesses.
So yes, NYT was absolutely gaslighting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Wouldnt that be the first thing you'd do if this wasnt true? If i was Joe Biden and the yellow press came after me honestly I'd do exactly what Joe Biden does and ignore them rather than giving them oxygen. If people like Biden or Clinton responded every time someone tries to capitalise on some bullshit attached to their name they'd not be doing anything else
> I'd do exactly what Joe Biden does and ignore them rather than giving them oxygen. Joe Biden ignored the reports? The article says Joe Biden responded, saying the meeting didn't take place: > In a Thursday afternoon statement, the Biden campaign said the paper “never asked . . . about the critical elements of this story,” and that a review of “Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time” show that “no meeting, as…
Yep.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, I don't think it's going to have the impact you think it will. The major criticism for S230 is that social media companies are rampant with fake news, and not doing enough to combat misinformation. If anything, it gives FB and Twitter a defense against an accusation of spreading political misinformation.
The only thing that terrifies me more than Trump is the number of my tech industry colleagues who seem to think we can and should abuse our power to shape public discourse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except the Washington Post isn't releasing possibly faked or hacked emails about Breonna Taylor being shot in her sleep three weeks before an election in a blatant attempt to manufacture an October Surprise. Don't try and create false equivalency here.
Respectfully, I beg to differ The Washington Post released unsubstantiated reports from anonymous sources that the DNC emails were hacked by Russia and released through Wikileaks. This is an extraordinary claim, and the evidence should be likewise extraordinary 4 years later, however, these remain allegations only, the lack of which drives the idea of a deep state conspiracy in conservative circles If you're inclined…
There was an indictment by the federal government[1][2]. That's certainly more reliable than a computer repairman finding an email on a hard drive on an abandoned computer.
[1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/grand-jury-indicts-12-russian...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Twitter (and every single commercial social media space) is not the above, and can do what it wants on its service. Not exactly. The public has the right to have all laws applied fairly. The social media platforms have enjoyed the rights of a neutral forum without the liabilities that come with being a publisher. Yet the platforms act like a publisher, deciding what is seen or not seen, and the public directly or i…
Yet you have no rights on a private platform. Is the New York Times forced to publish the same article? No, and they are a publisher. Their existence doesn't suddenly give you a right to use it and 'publish' what you'd like. Every forum online has rules about what you can and cannot post; there is no law stating they have to leave whatever you post up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was the NY Post article actually filled with disinformation? If the roles were reversed and a similar story came out about Trump and his son, would Twitter and Facebook have taken it down as part of a misinformation campaign?
> Was the NY Post article actually filled with disinformation? Yes. Parroting Russian disinformation during an election campaign because your owners don't like the politics of said disinformation target should be removed. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/14/biden-campaign-lash... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/14/us/politics/hunter-biden-... There needs to be more censorship on FB and YouTube which are in addit…
Their coverage in the lead up to the Iraq Invasion did more damage to this country, Her military, and the rest of the world than some mean tweets or made up BS about Russia. Should we ban the NYT, too?
Robert Graham [1] pointed out that if the emails are authentic, they can be trivially verified via DKIM. That the email metadata was not released implies the emails are either inauthentic, or that the post did not contact someone with basic competence in computer forensics. Either possibility seriously undercuts the article's credibility. [1] https://twitter.com/ErrataRob/status/1316407424648179717
Absolutely this can be trivially verified and needs to be. Release the emails if they're real so they can be verified. But also, isn't it the same thing with Trump's tax returns? All I've found so far is that the New York Times obtained copies, but they haven't actually released them to the public to be verified. If anyone can find the actual copies I'd like to see. We need to take all of the press releases about "le…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was the NY Post article actually filled with disinformation? If the roles were reversed and a similar story came out about Trump and his son, would Twitter and Facebook have taken it down as part of a misinformation campaign?
> Was the NY Post article actually filled with disinformation? Yes. Parroting Russian disinformation during an election campaign because your owners don't like the politics of said disinformation target should be removed. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/14/biden-campaign-lash... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/14/us/politics/hunter-biden-... There needs to be more censorship on FB and YouTube which are in addit…
These two seem to be begging for disruptive government intervention of the most unpleasant kind.