OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Bazal]

Selective censorship just makes them look like they have agendas .... of course there are particularly harmful things that should be censored, but trump rants arent really one of them

Agree with gary

Firstly, I haven't disagreed with Gary regarding censoring Trump specifically. It's actually the opposite, so weird retort.

Secondly they haven't censored his "rants", they've censored misleading comments about postal voting that have the potential to influence the election.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Firstly, I haven't disagreed with Gary regarding censoring Trump specifically. It's actually the opposite, so weird retort.

Secondly they haven't censored his "rants", they've censored misleading comments about postal voting that have the potential to influence the election.

Thirdly, suck a fart Strider.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Fourthly, who do I have to root around here to get a beer?

 

[strider]

Fifthly, it was a comment, not a retort

 

[Bazal]

Sixthly, I made a torte

 

[strider]

Seventhly, how long you think we can keep up this numbering?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yes we should always make room for alternative facts.

Cherry picking facts that support your position is what makes room for your opponents to reveal the facts that don't.

 

[Bandwagon]

Trump reams the media for spreading fake news

Then reams the social media for not allowing him to spread fake news.

Meanwhile Twitter are preempting the reaming they're gonna cop after the 2020 election for being the source of fake news. They don't wanna be Facebook post 2016

Maybe they think they know who's gonna win?

For the record, I think the proposition that a major tech multinational with a market cap in excess of 25 billion USD is some kinda leftist breeding ground is rather f**king laughable..

 

[Poupou Escobar]

For the record, I think the proposition that a major tech multinational with a market cap in excess of 25 billion USD is some kinda leftist breeding ground is rather f**king laughable..

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/09/twitter-left-leftwing-customers-small-business

https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech...bias-says-it-doesnt-influence-company-policy/

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/14/17857622/twitter-liberal-employees-conservative-trump-politics

 

[T.S Quint]

Firstly, I haven't disagreed with Gary regarding censoring Trump specifically. It's actually the opposite, so weird retort.

Secondly they haven't censored his "rants", they've censored misleading comments about postal voting that have the potential to influence the election.

Is this really censorship though? What have they censored. His tweets are there to read in full for anyone who wants to read them.
They just have a link attached to them which sends you to a fact checker. You don’t have to click on it if you don’t want to.

I’m not sure I would consider that censorship.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

I think part of the argument, now, is about whether Twitter are a platform (as they have claimed) or a publisher (like the media, which they claim they are not), isn't it?

And now, with Twitter going around trying to state what is true and what is fake (and it doesn't matter if they are correct or not) then doesn't that move them into the position of a publisher?

If so...wouldn't that then bring them under federal regulation as a media company?

Anyways...I agree that censorship is a slippery slope and, even if Trump is being a douchebag (which he often is), it's a dangerous thing to censor him. It also, as has been agreed here, plays right into his hands (and possibly even in a legal sense, as I just mentioned).

 

[Bandwagon]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/09/twitter-left-leftwing-customers-small-business

https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech...bias-says-it-doesnt-influence-company-policy/

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/14/17857622/twitter-liberal-employees-conservative-trump-politics

I know, some people do struggle with the concept that liberal and left aren't the same thing.

Crazy shit .

 

[Gary Gutful]

I know, some people do struggle with the concept that liberal and left aren't the same thing.

Crazy shit .

You are correct in saying that it isn't a "leftist breeding ground", but I think that is a rather crude characterisation of the criticism of these companies.

Twitter's CEO has openly admitted that they are biased. I applaud him for being open about that, but naturally anyone with half a brain will be sceptical whenever Twitter insert a red flag over a tweet because they think it isn't factual.

 

[Gronk]

I think part of the argument, now, is about whether Twitter are a platform (as they have claimed) or a publisher (like the media, which they claim they are not), isn't it?

And now, with Twitter going around trying to state what is true and what is fake (and it doesn't matter if they are correct or not) then doesn't that move them into the position of a publisher?

If so...wouldn't that then bring them under federal regulation as a media company?

Anyways...I agree that censorship is a slippery slope and, even if Trump is being a douchebag (which he often is), it's a dangerous thing to censor him. It also, as has been agreed here, plays right into his hands (and possibly even in a legal sense, as I just mentioned).

Twitter is not censoring or moderating, more accurately they are flagging posts as being potentially inaccurate or misleading and offering a link to a more factual explanation of the matter.

 

[Bandwagon]

You are correct in saying that it isn't a "leftist breeding ground", but I think that is a rather crude characterisation of the criticism of these companies.

Twitter's CEO has openly admitted that they are biased. I applaud him for being open about that, but naturally anyone with half a brain will be sceptical whenever Twitter insert a red flag over a tweet because they think it isn't factual.

I think it's all very well for Twitter's CEO to state he has a left bias, or even that his company does. But I'd be taking the whole thing with a grain of salt as to how that translates into how the company behaves.

Twitters stock in trade is adversarial "conversations", there's no money for them in the creation of consensus, arguments keep people engaged, engaged people = $$$$ in their bank.

Now the idea that through their leftist bias Twitter is playing into the hands of Trump is little better than a trope, Twitter knows exactly what it's doing. Firing up Trump fires up a good many of his 80 million followers, and those aren't all Trump supporters, not by a long way. And what are they gonna do?

They're gonna engage on Twitter, They're gonna put Twitter in the news, but most of all they're gonna create revenue for Twitter.

So yeah it likely is good for Trump, but hey, the Twitter dudes don't see what a bunch of us nuffies on a little RL forum thousands of miles away can see, and somehow we know shit about their business that they don't know, f**k, really?

They're obviously wasting a shit ton of money on analytics, cause they coulda just posted in here and got their shit sorted for free!

For mine, even if the lot of Twitter's management are personally liberal leaning, in their professional life they are f**king uber capitalists, and they aren't there to change the world, they are there to make money.

And at this point in time, Trump is a f**king cash cow for them. They aren't censoring him ( FFS his comments are all there to see, how the f**k is that censorship? ) They are firing him up.

#RegisterGoesKaching!

 

[Gronk]

Twitter is not censoring or moderating, more accurately they are flagging posts as being potentially inaccurate or misleading and offering a link to a more factual explanation of the matter.

View attachment 38509

By the way, we had similar outrage in Australia with the ABC. Whilst Abbott was at the wheel the ABC had an internal department dedicated to fact checking statements by politicians and other matters of public interest. The LNP threatened further funding cuts if they did not fold the fact check department. The ABC had no choice but to wind back.

Later MIT university stepped up and now funds their own fact checking media department and the ABC reports their findings.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/

 

[Gronk]

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I know, some people do struggle with the concept that liberal and left aren't the same thing.

Crazy shit .

No because I'm liberal and lean more to the right than the left. I'm aware of the difference.

In the case of Twitter though, Jack Dorsey has admitted the majority of his employees are anti-conservative, and whatever Trump's personal politics in sure you'll agree they will be anti him too.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I think it's all very well for Twitter's CEO to state he has a left bias, or even that his company does. But I'd be taking the whole thing with a grain of salt as to how that translates into how the company behaves.

Twitters stock in trade is adversarial "conversations", there's no money for them in the creation of consensus, arguments keep people engaged, engaged people = $$$$ in their bank.

Now the idea that through their leftist bias Twitter is playing into the hands of Trump is little better than a trope, Twitter knows exactly what it's doing. Firing up Trump fires up a good many of his 80 million followers, and those aren't all Trump supporters, not by a long way. And what are they gonna do?

They're gonna engage on Twitter, They're gonna put Twitter in the news, but most of all they're gonna create revenue for Twitter.

So yeah it likely is good for Trump, but hey, the Twitter dudes don't see what a bunch of us nuffies on a little RL forum thousands of miles away can see, and somehow we know shit about their business that they don't know, f**k, really?

They're obviously wasting a shit ton of money on analytics, cause they coulda just posted in here and got their shit sorted for free!

For mine, even if the lot of Twitter's management are personally liberal leaning, in their professional life they are f**king uber capitalists, and they aren't there to change the world, they are there to make money.

And at this point in time, Trump is a f**king cash cow for them. They aren't censoring him ( FFS his comments are all there to see, how the f**k is that censorship? ) They are firing him up.

#RegisterGoesKaching!

Nobody said they don't want conservatives' money. The point is they are trying to have their cake and eat it too, encouraging conservatives to engage on their platform while subjecting them to one-sided scrutiny.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

By the way, we had similar outrage in Australia with the ABC. Whilst Abbott was at the wheel the ABC had an internal department dedicated to fact checking statements by politicians and other matters of public interest. The LNP threatened further funding cuts if they did not fold the fact check department. The ABC had no choice but to wind back.

Later MIT university stepped up and now funds their own fact checking media department and the ABC reports their findings.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/

And I'm sure MIT (and the ABC) devote plenty of resources to investigating the facts supporting their own biases. I wonder if Twitter will be flagging tweets supporting nonsense about female penises and socialist economics and other left wing issues.