OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Gronk]

The orange merkin is turning read.

 

[84 Baby]

Twitter - “Still failing to grasp how Trump got elected”

 

[Bazal]

Twitter - “Still failing to grasp how Trump got elected”

Yeah, this'll play into his hands.

But i can also see where they're coming from.

Tbh the idea of the f**king President having Twitter baffles me anyway

 

[Gary Gutful]

Twitter shouldn't be intervening. Let him say whatever he wants and people can make up their own minds.

 

[Bazal]

Twitter shouldn't be intervening. Let him say whatever he wants and people can make up their own minds.

LU shouldn't be intervening. Let Casper say whatever he wants and people can make up their own minds.

They can run their business however they like tbh. And they'll reap the reward or the detriment

 

[Bazal]

I particularly like, though, his suggestion that Twitter should abide by a constitutional amendment that doesn't apply to them.

The guy knows how to work up his target audience

 

[Gronk]

Twitter shouldn't be intervening. Let him say whatever he wants and people can make up their own minds.

It's a private company and they can do what they like ?

Facebook took a battering after the 2016 election and it gained a reputation as a conduit for false manipulative news reports (fake news).

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/22/facebook-profit-fall-fake-news-privacy-scandals

So if twitter or whoever wish to protect their brand, then surely they are entitled to do that ?

 

[Gary Gutful]

It's a private company and they can do what they like ?

Facebook took a battering after the 2016 election and it gained a reputation as a conduit for false manipulative news reports (fake news).

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/22/facebook-profit-fall-fake-news-privacy-scandals

So if twitter or whoever wish to protect their brand, then surely they are entitled to do that ?

I'm against Twitter, YouTube or anyone else censoring stuff because they don't like it. Its a slippery slope and will ultimately do their brand more harm than good. Its also virtually impossible to fairly police.

 

[Gary Gutful]

LU shouldn't be intervening. Let Casper say whatever he wants and people can make up their own minds.

They can run their business however they like tbh. And they'll reap the reward or the detriment

Of course they can. I'm suggesting that they should be running it differently.

 

[Bazal]

I'm against Twitter, YouTube or anyone else censoring stuff because they don't like it. Its a slippery slope and will ultimately do their brand more harm than good. Its also virtually impossible to fairly police.

Not censoring is a pretty slippery slope too, mate. I'd argue worse than some censorship

 

[Bazal]

Of course they can. I'm suggesting that they should be running it differently.

I'm sure the billionaires in charge will seek your counsel next time. And mine, for that matter lol.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Not censoring is a pretty slippery slope too, mate. I'd argue worse than some censorship

How?

 

[Gronk]

I'm against Twitter, YouTube or anyone else censoring stuff because they don't like it. Its a slippery slope and will ultimately do their brand more harm than good. Its also virtually impossible to fairly police.

They exist to make money from ads. If the unmoderated content causes ad revenue to drop, then surely it makes commercial sense to remedy the problem. I expect they have a duty of care to their shareholders to do all thing necessary to maximise profit rather than taking some sort of noble "all comers" policy.

 

[Gary Gutful]

I'm sure the billionaires in charge will seek your counsel next time. And mine, for that matter lol.

I've already got enough billionaires to deal with. I'll send them your way.

 

[Gary Gutful]

They exist to make money from ads. If the unmoderated content causes ad revenue to drop, then surely it makes commercial sense to remedy the problem. I expect they have a duty of care to their shareholders to do all thing necessary to maximise profit rather than taking some sort of noble "all comers" policy.

Do you know that unmoderated content is causing ad revenue to drop?

 

[Gronk]

Do you know that unmoderated content is causing ad revenue to drop?

Unmoderated was a term that I probably should not have used. They are not proposing to moderate tweets. The original ^^ article flags tweets that are potentially erroneous or misleading and recommends that the user fact checks statements or claims.

There has been a study into fact vs fiction by MIT and I am sure that the Board take its findings very seriously.

The massive new study analyzes every major contested news story in English across the span of Twitter’s existence—some 126,000 stories, tweeted by 3 million users, over more than 10 years—and finds that the truth simply cannot compete with hoax and rumor. By every common metric, falsehood consistently dominates the truth on Twitter, the study finds: Fake news and false rumors reach more people, penetrate deeper into the social network, and spread much faster than accurate stories.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...gest-study-ever-fake-news-mit-twitter/555104/

 

[Bazal]

How?

Not sure I want kids being recommended a snuff vid or S&M porn in their PewDeePie sidebar, personally.

As with just about anything it's about balance. But it's also a moot point cos private entities can do whatever they like in terms of censoring their content

 

[Twizzle]

I dont get why a POTUS think he should be ruling his constituents via social media in the first place.

When he signs into Twitter he agrees to their terms and conditions so not sure he has much of an argument.

 

[Gronk]

I dont get why a POTUS think he should be ruling his constituents via social media in the first place.

When he signs into Twitter he agrees to their terms and conditions so not sure he has much of an argument.

Youtube banned that Alex Jones merkin after he persisted with his pro-NRA "Sandy Hook was fake news run by paid actors" rhetoric. He tried to take them to court and the court said that Alphabet (aka google aka Youtube) can ban who they f**king like.

 

[84 Baby]

Youtube banned that Alex Jones merkin after he persisted with his pro-NRA "Sandy Hook was fake news run by paid actors" rhetoric. He tried to take them to court and the court said that Alphabet (aka google aka Youtube) can ban who they f**king like.

They sure can. But they probably shouldn’t be surprised when it plays into the right wingers hands over fake news. Particularly when Trump got voted in largely because of it