Twitter is better

[Ban Basketball]

I can only imagine how electric with rage people would be if I owned Twitter.

Mis/disinformation bans galore,  as well as any kind of fascist and/or speech that serves no social utility.  I'd have a field day with it. 

[BobDole]

22 minutes ago, jross said:

The latest insight says that Twitter couldn't find a reason to ban Trump, but they did anyways because employees demanded it.

Fire!  Fire!  Wake up!  You were asleep!  Wake up!

Twitter Files

1. Free speech used to matter: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1533972260062736385.html
2. The Twitter files: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1598822959866683394.html
3. The Twitter files supp: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1600243405841666048.html
4. Secret exclusion lists: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601007575633305600.html
5. Removing Trump Jan6: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601352083617505281.html
6. Removing Trump Jan7: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601720455005511680.html
7. Removing Trump Jan8: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1602364197194432515.html

As stated above, you can have hard rules like not posting explicit pictures or someone's real name and address. However, the ones that really should be banned do not break those easy rules to defend. 

It can be argued to death if Trump's tweets instigated a riot. It can be argued to death that NJ Dan is annoying and abrasive and makes this place less enticing to visit.   More or less Twitter didn't want Trump to use their platform to spread his lies. That is the reason behind him being banned, plain and simple.  Just like McDonalds can ban me from going in there after I pee all over the counter, Twitter can ban someone for whatever reason they want.

None of this should surprise anyone with regards to how big companies do business. Wait until you hear about FTX and how they sent lobbyists to decrease regulations so they could steal more money.

For someone that wants less government, it sounds like you want more.

[Theo Brixton]

From multiple sources, Twitter was less-than-vigilant in cleaning up certain truly vile posts and accounts (like child porn/pedos). Perhaps it's not too surprising given the former head of "Trust and Saftey's" background:

Twitter Files clearly shows that certain high-level employees wanted to limit the reach of Trump's speech. It had little to do with lies (yes, Trump was full of it) because even within their private Slack conversations they were grasping for reasons to de-platform him when his tweets did not violate TOS. 

To add further perspective, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel publicly criticized the decision to de-platform Trump. I would hardly call them MAGA. This is besides the fact that there were many others who were banned or "shadow-banned" for daring to utter wrongthink. In some instances it is almost certain that this censorship was directed by people within the USG. I am willing to bet when the Covid Twitter Files are released, it's going to look particularly ugly.  

When Twitter effectively acts as the cyber "Town Square" (a cliche but apt description) it is dangerous (and perhaps unconstitutional) for people with a clear idealogical bent working hand in glove with multiple government agencies to decide which speech is censored. Even a Democratic Congressman could recognize this.

That American citizens have no problem with this is troubling. It has nothing to do with left vs. right. If Twitter existed in its current form during the Bush years, there should be no doubt that questioning the Iraq war would have been dealt with in a similarly heavy-handed manner. If you think that notion is ridiculous, just look what happened to Chris Hedges during that time. 

[jross]

We are in this weird situation where big tech has monopoly power on information, and the danger to democracy has been realized.  

Twitter has a 25% USA population penetration.  

This is different than CNN and Fox News with their 1%.  I don't like it but don't fear when (Fox News or) CNN Technical Director Charlie Chester says 

Quote

“Look what we did; we [CNN] got Trump out. I am 100% going to say it, and I 100% believe that if it wasn't for CNN, I don't know that Trump would have got voted out. I came to CNN because I wanted to be a part of that.” 

The bias from moderators in the presidential elections is a problem because 70M people watch.  Left or Right bias is a problem.  Giving the topics/questions before the debate is also a problem.  Not okay with that...

Edited December 12, 2022 by jross

[mspart]

But those on the left don't see a problem with it?   Remember the stunning silence on the left when this was brought to light?  I guess they figured Hillary needed all the help she could get.   And it still didn't work.

mspart

[Mike Parrish]

Social media is brain poison.

I have yet to see evidence of anything legally actionable.

[BerniePragle]

3 hours ago, jross said:

The latest insight says that Twitter couldn't find a reason to ban Trump, but they did anyways because employees demanded it.

Fire!  Fire!  Wake up!  You were asleep!  Wake up!

Twitter Files

1. Free speech used to matter: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1533972260062736385.html
2. The Twitter files: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1598822959866683394.html
3. The Twitter files supp: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1600243405841666048.html
4. Secret exclusion lists: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601007575633305600.html
5. Removing Trump Jan6: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601352083617505281.html
6. Removing Trump Jan7: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601720455005511680.html
7. Removing Trump Jan8: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1602364197194432515.html

If this weren't written 135 years earlier, I'd swear it was about DJT:

“The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”
― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

If people read instead of watching the boob tube, and read something besides social media, they may have a vastly different opinion of the jerk.  Many, many verses from the bible and quotes from great writers that could be paraphrased "Don't be a Trump".

[Ban Basketball]

16 minutes ago, mspart said:

But those on the left don't see a problem with it?   Remember the stunning silence on the left when this was brought to light?  I guess they figured Hillary needed all the help she could get.   And it still didn't work.

mspart

Tough to beat the efforts of a big,  foreign adversarial gubment working directly with one of the campaigns.

[mspart]

And that has been debunked and is fake news.   And you know it but insist on putting it out there.  The facts have been provided to show that it was Hillary that spread that news with the Steele Dossier, which has been debunked a long time ago.  Tough to let go of things.  Yeah, you and your "real news" sources.   The impeachment of Trump was weak and failed and the Mueller investigation found nothing, and the FBI knew the Dossier was fake and still used it as evidence that they needed a FISA warrant to spy on US citizens.  Interesting that you are ok with spreading such fake news like it was real news and interesting that you apparently support illegally obtained FISA warrants to spy on US citizens.   

mspart

[Mike Parrish]

3 minutes ago, mspart said:

And that has been debunked and is fake news.   And you know it but insist on putting it out there.  The facts have been provided to show that it was Hillary that spread that news with the Steele Dossier, which has been debunked a long time ago.  Tough to let go of things.  Yeah, you and your "real news" sources.   The impeachment of Trump was weak and failed and the Mueller investigation found nothing, and the FBI knew the Dossier was fake and still used it as evidence that they needed a FISA warrant to spy on US citizens.  Interesting that you are ok with spreading such fake news like it was real news and interesting that you apparently support illegally obtained FISA warrants to spy on US citizens.   

mspart

lol, no

[mspart]

I'm happy to hear that Mike.   The post was aimed at BB. 

mspart

[Ban Basketball]

10 minutes ago, mspart said:

And that has been debunked and is fake news.   And you know it but insist on putting it out there.  The facts have been provided to show that it was Hillary that spread that news with the Steele Dossier, which has been debunked a long time ago.  Tough to let go of things.  Yeah, you and your "real news" sources.   The impeachment of Trump was weak and failed and the Mueller investigation found nothing, and the FBI knew the Dossier was fake and still used it as evidence that they needed a FISA warrant to spy on US citizens.  Interesting that you are ok with spreading such fake news like it was real news and interesting that you apparently support illegally obtained FISA warrants to spy on US citizens.   

mspart

Yet another who didn't read the Mueller report. The Mueller report details the collusion, the obstruction of justice ( eight instances), and Deuce's efforts to save his "presidency" as a result. 

Plus,  a study also showed that the Russian efforts did influence how people viewed Clinton. 

Sorry,  but alternative realities are not allowed with me. 

[Mike Parrish]

1 hour ago, mspart said:

I'm happy to hear that Mike.   The post was aimed at BB. 

mspart

You clearly haven't read the Mueller report.

[Mike Parrish]

[Theo Brixton]

Did anyone here actually read the full Mueller report? If your answer is 'yes', then my next question is this: why? I have little doubt that even some members of the Mueller team responsible for the document didn't bother to read it in its entirety. A quick perusal of the document makes it abundantly clear that the findings don't live up to the treasonous intimations people like John Brennan made for years. 

But maybe I missed something. Maybe people like Glenn Greenwald also miss the point. Glenn Greenwald, a dyed in the wool liberal who is a preeminent expert on the abuses of the US security state had this to say about the Mueller Report (free article if you are willing to enter a (fake) email address): https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-merely-reject-the-trumprussia-conspiracy-theories-he-obliterated-them/

What does he miss? I'm willing to bet his thoughts on the matter are more cogent than the pablum passed off as keen "insights" by the access journalists littering legacy media corporations.

Even as someone who realizes that Trump was a patently inadequate candidate for the Presidency, I find the close relationship between left-leaning MSM and former (and current?) security agency personnel unsettling. John Brennan and people like him were routinely paraded around on MSM insinuating Trump is days from imminent demise and the talking heads lapped it up like they were center stage in a bukkake film. This episode is an absolute disgrace to the concept of journalism. But everyone accepted it--some with glee--because Trump is such an unseemly lout. 

[BobDole]

14 hours ago, jross said:

We are in this weird situation where big tech has monopoly power on information, and the danger to democracy has been realized.  

Twitter has a 25% USA population penetration.  

This is different than CNN and Fox News with their 1%.  I don't like it but don't fear when (Fox News or) CNN Technical Director Charlie Chester says 

The bias from moderators in the presidential elections is a problem because 70M people watch.  Left or Right bias is a problem.  Giving the topics/questions before the debate is also a problem.  Not okay with that...

So because they have a bigger "market" share, they need different laws? Most people don't go to Twitter for politics, people go to CNN and Fox for politics. 

So you want more regulations because they censored stuff you agree with, is that correct? If so you probably should start with CNN since they censor and twist stuff you agree with also.

[Mike Parrish]

On the COVID front

 

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2022/two-years-covid-vaccines-prevented-millions-deaths-hospitalizations

[Mike Parrish]

On 12/8/2022 at 3:22 PM, jross said:

 Twitter, Google, and Facebook monopolize the public communication square.  If I want to share life happenings with grandma casually, it will be Facebook.  Facebook has ~80%, Google has ~90%, and Twitter has ~25% penetration in the USA population.  They are applying censorship bias that influences elections, the government is involved in censorship, and the average person has no idea.  Folks on this forum tell me I have a tin foil hat when presented with reliable evidence.

Why is it that when a company goes public, it must share financial earnings regularly?  They must follow the strict rules laid out by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the government body which oversees capital markets and protects investors. 

Here's a take on email filtering that might speak to you.

https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2022/Items/Dec13-3.html

[BobDole]

8 minutes ago, Mike Parrish said:

Here's a take on email filtering that might speak to you.

https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2022/Items/Dec13-3.html

It's the dumb kids saying the smart kids are picking on them because they are using big words.

[jross]

Jack could be in legal trouble if he knowingly lied to congress about censorship, shadow banning, etc.  Jack's supporters could be correct about Elon, but why post their losses by attributing the Jack-blessed narrative?  

[Mike Parrish]

Good luck trying to prove a criminal against Dorsey.

[jross]

Jack has words.  If only he delivered what he wanted.

• https://www.getrevue.co/profile/jackjack/issues/a-native-internet-protocol-for-social-media-1503112

[jross]

21 hours ago, Mike Parrish said:

Here's a take on email filtering that might speak to you.

https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2022/Items/Dec13-3.html

I may not have read a single political email or postal mail from politics; that stuff goes straight to the trash.  I don't see many commercials anymore, so it's mostly televised debates that I choose to consume or Twitter, where I go for entertainment, news, education, etc., but unfortunately, politics is amplified.  

[BobDole]

13 hours ago, jross said:

Jack could be in legal trouble if he knowingly lied to congress about censorship, shadow banning, etc.  Jack's supporters could be correct about Elon, but why post their losses by attributing the Jack-blessed narrative?  

Good luck with that, he may be guilty, but has enough money to get out of it. 

[jross]

23 hours ago, BobDole said:

So because they have a bigger "market" share, they need different laws?

Monopolies often warrant regulation.

 

23 hours ago, BobDole said:

Most people don't go to Twitter for politics, people go to CNN and Fox for politics. 

Agreed. 

I use Twitter for news, entertainment, education, and banter because it is where the monopoly of social media discussion occurs.  I do not go there for politics but politics is included in what the community discusses, and it's amplified.

 

23 hours ago, BobDole said:

So you want more regulations because they censored stuff you agree with, is that correct? 

I want regulations because Twitter has a monopoly on anonymous social discussion, and they used their mass power of influence to discreetly influence society in an underhanded manner.  This is harmful and dangerous.  

Had the right behaved the way the left did, I'd be just as frustrated with them.

I'm frustrated because of how the left behaved, not because of their views, many of which I share.