Big D vs Twitter

[Mors]

So it looks like Donald wants to go after Twitter, and this time for a reason which I think is absolutely fair for him to do so - If they're going to modify his tweets and add a fact checker, they need to be doing this across the board and doing to everyones, or not at all, they can't just single him out.

Can he win this one?

From what I can make it out, it seems like Twitter can't be sued or has protection against being sued at any time by saying 'its not out fault boss, it was someone else that posted it on our platform, it wasn't us', the same defence that Torrent websites try to take when they say it's not them that's hosting the illegal content. But this executive order seems to be that if they're moderating posts and editing them, then they're actually taking ownership of the tweet, so can therefore be sued and don't have the protection anymore?

I hate social media in the main, it's absolute nonsense, and it now has huge huge huge power, and can pretty much swing elections now it's that powerful. For fucks sake it made bog roll run out in this country recently. They do need to do something about it but good knows what. If they don't moderate it, then the idiots that use it will believe anything that's posted on it, if they heavily moderate it then what's the point of it, but I don't think as a business model they have any appetite to have some sort of middle ground as all they want to do is make money out of it.

 

[dantes]

That's one side of the coin, but I don't think Big D is interested in them not being held to account for people posting illegal stuff on their platform. It is more if you want to delete that stuff, then you need to explain the reason beyond a reference to company policy. Because twitter and the other platforms have a habit of deleting things which support trump, and leaving things which defame and defile him. So Big D is removing that freedom from twitter, so that in future they need to give substantive reasons for why certain things are being censored.

 

[jon545660]

Didn't twitter also add a fact check to a Chinese Government tweet that claimed Covid came from the US?

Sounds consistent.

 

[Halmeister]

Ideally, we shouldn't be having this discussion. But when the most powerful man in the world (trademark) is spouting incendiary, inflammatory comments that could lead to widespread violence, as well as propagating various lies and myths for his own personal gain, something needs to be done. He's abusing his power.

 

[The Nomad]

I think the scores are currently

Twitter 3
Big D 0

For anyone like me keeping tabs.

He's just had a tweet warning for glorifying violence.

 

[dantes]

Being 3-0 down around this time of year means nothing.

Also I'm not sure if I'm missing something on account of my bias, but Big D is condemning the violence in that tweet? Of course he shouldn't be condemning shit, it's none of his god damn business, but ok there's an election coming up so he needs to say something. Yet how have twitter fact checked him for glorifying violence? They're hilariously insane. Maybe the twitter bot has scanned his tweets, matched some keywords like "trump" "violence" and issued an automatic warning on behalf of creepy joe.

 

[rubans]

That’s a lot of battles to handle at the same time. Twitter, China, Covid-19 plus all the while snorting anti malaria tablets, impressive going by anyone standards.

 

[dantes]

Compare that to the lazy useless fat fuck that sits in No 10. You will see I was right, there is no comparison at all. Big D is a billionaire because he understands capitalism and works smart. Hardest working president ever. Boris is a career politician because he's a thick useless waste of carbon.

 

[Mors]

Ideally, we shouldn't be having this discussion. But when the most powerful man in the world (trademark) is spouting incendiary, inflammatory comments that could lead to widespread violence, as well as propagating various lies and myths for his own personal gain, something needs to be done. He's abusing his power.

Although you may well be right about what Big D is saying, that's not for me to say, I think the focus needs to be that if they censor him, which they can do, they need to deal an even hand. They need to start censoring any nonsense out of his rival candidates (they can just use any old bollocks they see fit to link to for the 'fact checker'), and also start doing it to the wanker conservative and Labour party's over here, making up any old shit.

 

[jon545660]

Although you may well be right about what Big D is saying, that's not for me to say, I think the focus needs to be that if they censor him, which they can do, they need to deal an even hand. They need to start censoring any nonsense out of his rival candidates (they can just use any old bollocks they see fit to link to for the 'fact checker'), and also start doing to the wanker conservative and Labour party's over here, making up any old shit.

Does this count?

 

[Halmeister]

Although you may well be right about what Big D is saying, that's not for me to say, I think the focus needs to be that if they censor him, which they can do, they need to deal an even hand. They need to start censoring any nonsense out of his rival candidates (they can just use any old bollocks they see fit to link to for the 'fact checker'), and also start doing to the wanker conservative and Labour party's over here, making up any old shit.

Oh, everyone is full of shit. Our government over here could do with something similar.

But I don't think anyone on Twitter is as dangerous as Trump, though, so I think fact-checking him is imperative. Although, he'll just denounce it as fake news and his supporters will believe him, so who knows?

 

[Athens]

Twitter is a private company, isn't it? Surely they can censor whoever the fuck they like and the consumer can either stay with them or move platforms.

 

[Mors]

Does this count?

No, not really. Due to the such tiny tiny instances and consistency of it happening, it looks like they're targeting certain people for whatever motives. Also, who fact checks the fact checks? How do we have trust in the links they're providing? So these links are the be all and all all and prove that the original tweet was completely and utterly incorrect and a lie top to bottom?

 

[Mors]

Twitter is a private company, isn't it? Surely they can censor whoever the fuck they like and the consumer can either stay with them or move platforms.

That's not being very inclusive and human rights aware now is it. That's be a bit like me opening a cake shop and refusing to sell cakes if I don't like what's being written on the cake and saying go and use some other cake shop.

 

[Athens]

That's not being very inclusive and human rights aware now is it

It's a free platform (well, as long as you don't mind them selling your info) so it's perfectly inclusive. Also, it's not exactly part of your human rights that a privately owned company should continue to broadcast your rants even if you're spouting all sorts of mad dog shit.

 

[Athens]

Twitter is like a bar that allows everyone in but if you go around starting fights then they might kick you out.

 

[jon545660]

No, not really. Due to the such tiny tiny instances and consistency of it happening, it looks like they're targeting certain people for whatever motives. Also, who fact checks the fact checks? How do we have trust in the links they're providing? So these links are the be all and all all and prove that the original tweet was completely and utterly incorrect and a lie top to bottom?

Well you said "they need to deal an even hand."

1 Trump tweet fact checked and 1 Chinese gov tweet fact checked.

 

[Mors]

Not that I'm counting or even read any of these tweets, but I'm sure the article said they'd done a couple of his? And as it's stemmed from an internal discussion regards to election ballot rigging, I'm not sure how randomly doing a fact check on a random chinese official about something random is evening it all up. I'm sure there's plenty of his rival candidates talking nonsense, and the conservative and labour wankers over here that would have been time much better spent. 350mill to the NHS and fully costed manifesto's would have been a good start.

 

[dantes]

Not fact checked. 3-3.

 

[StevieM]

Not fact checked. 3-3.

Please.... can we fact check whether Trump fucked 13 yr old girls and lambs.

Please.... let’s delve in to it, get testimony, ask questions - make sure it’s on the front on every newspaper and discussed on every news show - “Did Trump fuck a lamb”.

Maybe a senate hearing - open - where all wittiness can come forward and we can get to the truth.

If it’s false - then those cads should definitely be banned from Twitter.

 

[jon545660]

Not that I'm counting or even read any of these tweets, but...

It would've been nice if you'd admitted to being ignorant of the situation in your first post and saved me the bother. That's 10 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

 

[Mors]

If you are reading all of his tweets, I'd suggest you stop and spend some of the rest of your life doing better things.

 

[binomial]

But this executive order seems to be that if they're moderating posts and editing them, then they're actually taking ownership of the tweet, so can therefore be sued and don't have the protection anymore?

Very valid point.

 

[binomial]

If you are reading all of his tweets, I'd suggest you stop and spend some of the rest of your life doing better things.

Reading 1 tweet from anyone is bad enough let alone all of someones tweets.

Only time I actually browse twitter near the transfer windows for any exclusives.

 

[StevieM]

 

[keniget]

Whats the point of putting on the pretense of trying to be reasonable and objective?

Mors opening gambit should’ve just been “Twitter has started policing Trump’s tweets and I don’t like it because I kinda lean that way”.

 

[Mors]

Absolutely.

 

[manwithnoname]

As soon as Twitter makes editorial decisions and censures content, they absolutely should be classified as a publisher, and treated accordingly.

Which is why Zuckerberg is backing the fuck away from this debate at light-speed

 

[dantes]

View attachment 1653

Reacting to and/or not being triggered by ______

 

[darkstarexodus]

Reading 1 tweet from anyone is bad enough let alone all of someones tweets.

Only time I actually browse twitter near the transfer windows for any exclusives.

Going on Twitter for "transfer exclusives" is pretty much the stupidest way to use Twitter and those accounts should also get fact checked.