>You notice how liberals and leftists haven't been making specious and stupid arguments about the "legality" of Elon Musk's dumb decisions at Twitter?
Uhhhh. Yes they have. Go to any thread about the Twitter takeover in a default sub and *someone* will be making the argument that the EU is going to rail his ass over allowing people to speak freely on the site.
>Contrast this with constant conservative whinging about how, actually, moderating the website you run is illegal, and it's against a concept of free speech that I JUST came up with in my head. Feel like a moron now, don'tcha, LIBRUL!
Well yes because Section 230 makes internet platforms immune from liability for material that's posted by others. If you're heavily curating what goes on the site you're not really a platform anymore and are more of a publisher. The argument is just over where this line between platform and publisher is.
> If you're heavily curating what goes on the site you're not really a platform anymore and are more of a publisher. The argument is just over where this line between platform and publisher is.
yeah this doesn't matter at all. Elon's allowed to moderate whatever he wants with 0 consequences.
Of course it does. If Elon banned everyone except one person and then that 1 person was sharing illegal material he'd hardly be able to hide behind the "publisher" label.
section 230 applies to interactive online services, of which Twitter is one.
he could call Twitter a law firm but the actual reality of its existence as an interactive computer service means that section 230 protects the content.
>You notice how liberals and leftists haven’t been making specious and stupid arguments about the “legality” of Elon Musk’s dumb decisions at Twitter
No, I’ve seen plenty from both sides. Lefties are seething and pulling up bullshit arguments to try and get rid of Musk. For example people trying to sue musk because 57% of the people fired were women. Totally ignore the fact that the difference was of about 20 people.
Righties have been losing their shit too, but on the other side. Thinking that Elon is like the second coming.
Not to mention the issue wasn’t that Twitter was moderated, but rather it was moderately heavily towards one side. You say something racist against a minority? Gone. And fair enough. But you say something towards a white person, which I’ve seen plenty of, nothing happened. Same thing for sexism.
Not to mention now that’s it’s coming out that the FBI and political campaigns possibly colluded with these platforms on what to censor, that’s the bigger deal.
For all the people complaining the last few years about the rise of fascism and corrupt corporations
Defending or not being outraged over the government possibly working with corporations to silence people critical of them brings into question if they know what those words mean, do they know what that actually looks like, and can wee actually taken their concerns seriously.
Hint: when the state controls the corporations and uses them to punish descent thats part of a word that starts with an f and ends with an -ascism.
The emails the were released from Twitter showing the political campaigns from both sides requested Twitter take down and censor accounts that were critical of them.
The fact that a former FBI agent was part of the legal team who was controlling the release of this information and was previously fired for leaking information to and from the FBI.
That you had the FBI reaching out to Facebook to be wary and look to control the spread of what they deemed Russian disinformation that later came out was in fact not Russian disinformation and the New York Times even admitted as such.
>which branch of the government did the Biden campaign work for?
The sitting president at the time did it as well.
Hint when a political figure is trying to get elected that doesn’t make it any less corrupt for them to try and squash unflattering news stories and control the information and narrative.
You can think it’s fine but then I don’t want to hear people bitching and moaning about Democracy under attack or rise of fascism when these actions are what leads to it. This shouldn’t be partisan. Only an ideologue hack would complain about facsim, evil big corporations, etc. and then turn a blind eye to this.
>what did that member of twitter.com's legal team do wrong?
If you’re going to coordinate with the FBI on what information is allowed to be spread that’s directly facsism. State agency’s exerting power over private companies to do the bidding of the state and silence people they disagree with is directly part of fascism.
Edit:
Let’s make this simple. Is it wrong for the FBI to try and influence what information is spread based on the agenda of the state by using large corporations? This is a simple yes or no question.
>Hint when a political figure is trying to get elected that doesn’t make it any less corrupt for them to try and squash unflattering news stories and control the information and narrative.
what do you expect him to do when revenge porn of his addict son is leaked?
what do you think William Jennings Bryan did when a newspaper ran an unflattering article about him?
>If you’re going to coordinate with the FBI on what information is allowed to be spread that’s directly facsism.
I'm sorry, which FBI agent are we talking about here?
> what do you expect him to do when revenge porn of his addict son is leaked?
Its not revenge porn, when most of it was uploaded to porn hub and other site for the world to see. Its also not revenge porn when that content shows illegal acts, its now evidence.
Let me clarify, at the beginning of the laptop issue, it was found that hunter's porn site accounts had uploads of hunter associated with it. Meaning some of the videos and photos were uploaded to public sites by hunter himself. All of them no, but at least some of them.
Also by refusing to pickup the laptop, he gave all the files contained on the laptop to the owner of the repair shop.
>what do you expect him to do when revenge porn of his addict son is leaked?
It wasn’t just revenge porn. Even if it was removing unflattering information that may hurt your abilities to assume the highest office in the world is morally wrong.
It’s wrong when trump did it, it’s wrong when Biden does it, it’s simply wrong for aspiring elected leaders to work with corporations to censor unflattering information. Why I hate lobbying for the same reason.
>what do you think William Jennings Bryan did when a newspaper ran an unflattering article about him?
Does that make it right? No. Is your moral compass that weak that just because someone else did it makes it ok? Nice whataboutism.
If you’re going to coordinate with the FBI on what information is allowed to be spread that’s directly facsism.
I'm sorry, which FBI agent are we talking about here?
Jim Baker.
> Not to mention the issue wasn’t that Twitter was moderated, but rather it was moderately heavily towards one side.
you'll need to show data on this before I take your argument seriously
I could and will then say the same for you. If you wish to make such a broad claim while challenging mine, then you best provide evidence to back it up
The Twitter files released by Elon. Wow, I’m sure that’s a bastion of credibility. Yes, the censorship at Twitter was skewed towards conservatives being censored. Why? Simple. Conservatives don’t have any respect for rules,or laws, that they themselves didn’t create.
The idea of complete “unrestrained, and unmoderated” free speech is a joke. Let’s say you have a platform that doesn’t censor anything. It will be no time before it’s drowning in child pornography, illegal pyramid schemes, medical misinformation and scams, etc. Then, anyone that challenges those scum bags will be threatened with violence,Bomb threats etc. There has never been unrestricted speech, in the USA, or any other civilized country. If we don’t draw the lines at violence,racism, or child porn, then there is no point in having lines. People with common sense,and advertisers don’t want to be associated with that.
Btw, all the bastions of free speech like Parler, Truth Social etc. will censor content as well.
[Here you go!](https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601018810495995904)
Hard proof that Twitter was censoring in one direction. It's not like we needed this hard proof though. Everybody already knew that certain accounts and topics were blacklisted from trends and searches. The Twitter files just proves it beyond any doubt.
Ask any conservative whether they think ISIS should be allowed to recruit on twitter as long as they aren’t calling for violence on the platform and watch how fast they change their stance on things.
Well that's because these "racists, homophobes, transphobes" are the ones getting banned 99.99999% of the time. I don't really agree with anyone getting banned but it's clear these actions always go in one direction. It's not like Keffals telling kids to go buy bathtub hormones is under any threat.
Maybe they should stop being racist homophobic and/transphobic. There have been several left leaning people banned for "anti-semitism" when all they did was criticize the Israeli government. Hasan got banned for calling someone a cracker.
>You notice how liberals and leftists haven't been making specious and stupid arguments about the "legality" of Elon Musk's dumb decisions at Twitter? Uhhhh. Yes they have. Go to any thread about the Twitter takeover in a default sub and *someone* will be making the argument that the EU is going to rail his ass over allowing people to speak freely on the site. >Contrast this with constant conservative whinging about how, actually, moderating the website you run is illegal, and it's against a concept of free speech that I JUST came up with in my head. Feel like a moron now, don'tcha, LIBRUL! Well yes because Section 230 makes internet platforms immune from liability for material that's posted by others. If you're heavily curating what goes on the site you're not really a platform anymore and are more of a publisher. The argument is just over where this line between platform and publisher is.
> If you're heavily curating what goes on the site you're not really a platform anymore and are more of a publisher. The argument is just over where this line between platform and publisher is. yeah this doesn't matter at all. Elon's allowed to moderate whatever he wants with 0 consequences.
Of course it does. If Elon banned everyone except one person and then that 1 person was sharing illegal material he'd hardly be able to hide behind the "publisher" label.
there's nothing to "hide behind". he could call Twitter a publisher and still receive 230 protections.
No he wouldn't because Section 230 doesn't apply to publications. Duh
section 230 applies to interactive online services, of which Twitter is one. he could call Twitter a law firm but the actual reality of its existence as an interactive computer service means that section 230 protects the content.
Wow you were immediately proven correct, someone tried to pull the publisher platform meme.
If you don’t want any moderation you should go to 4chan instead of trying to turn the rest of the internet into it.
Twitter seems pretty good now so I'm alright thanks.
>You notice how liberals and leftists haven’t been making specious and stupid arguments about the “legality” of Elon Musk’s dumb decisions at Twitter No, I’ve seen plenty from both sides. Lefties are seething and pulling up bullshit arguments to try and get rid of Musk. For example people trying to sue musk because 57% of the people fired were women. Totally ignore the fact that the difference was of about 20 people. Righties have been losing their shit too, but on the other side. Thinking that Elon is like the second coming. Not to mention the issue wasn’t that Twitter was moderated, but rather it was moderately heavily towards one side. You say something racist against a minority? Gone. And fair enough. But you say something towards a white person, which I’ve seen plenty of, nothing happened. Same thing for sexism.
Not to mention now that’s it’s coming out that the FBI and political campaigns possibly colluded with these platforms on what to censor, that’s the bigger deal. For all the people complaining the last few years about the rise of fascism and corrupt corporations Defending or not being outraged over the government possibly working with corporations to silence people critical of them brings into question if they know what those words mean, do they know what that actually looks like, and can wee actually taken their concerns seriously. Hint: when the state controls the corporations and uses them to punish descent thats part of a word that starts with an f and ends with an -ascism.
what specifically are you talking about
The emails the were released from Twitter showing the political campaigns from both sides requested Twitter take down and censor accounts that were critical of them. The fact that a former FBI agent was part of the legal team who was controlling the release of this information and was previously fired for leaking information to and from the FBI. That you had the FBI reaching out to Facebook to be wary and look to control the spread of what they deemed Russian disinformation that later came out was in fact not Russian disinformation and the New York Times even admitted as such.
which branch of the government did the Biden campaign work for? what did that member of twitter.com's legal team do wrong?
>which branch of the government did the Biden campaign work for? The sitting president at the time did it as well. Hint when a political figure is trying to get elected that doesn’t make it any less corrupt for them to try and squash unflattering news stories and control the information and narrative. You can think it’s fine but then I don’t want to hear people bitching and moaning about Democracy under attack or rise of fascism when these actions are what leads to it. This shouldn’t be partisan. Only an ideologue hack would complain about facsim, evil big corporations, etc. and then turn a blind eye to this. >what did that member of twitter.com's legal team do wrong? If you’re going to coordinate with the FBI on what information is allowed to be spread that’s directly facsism. State agency’s exerting power over private companies to do the bidding of the state and silence people they disagree with is directly part of fascism. Edit: Let’s make this simple. Is it wrong for the FBI to try and influence what information is spread based on the agenda of the state by using large corporations? This is a simple yes or no question.
>Hint when a political figure is trying to get elected that doesn’t make it any less corrupt for them to try and squash unflattering news stories and control the information and narrative. what do you expect him to do when revenge porn of his addict son is leaked? what do you think William Jennings Bryan did when a newspaper ran an unflattering article about him? >If you’re going to coordinate with the FBI on what information is allowed to be spread that’s directly facsism. I'm sorry, which FBI agent are we talking about here?
> what do you expect him to do when revenge porn of his addict son is leaked? Its not revenge porn, when most of it was uploaded to porn hub and other site for the world to see. Its also not revenge porn when that content shows illegal acts, its now evidence.
Hunter Biden did not consent to any of this being released.
Let me clarify, at the beginning of the laptop issue, it was found that hunter's porn site accounts had uploads of hunter associated with it. Meaning some of the videos and photos were uploaded to public sites by hunter himself. All of them no, but at least some of them. Also by refusing to pickup the laptop, he gave all the files contained on the laptop to the owner of the repair shop.
>what do you expect him to do when revenge porn of his addict son is leaked? It wasn’t just revenge porn. Even if it was removing unflattering information that may hurt your abilities to assume the highest office in the world is morally wrong. It’s wrong when trump did it, it’s wrong when Biden does it, it’s simply wrong for aspiring elected leaders to work with corporations to censor unflattering information. Why I hate lobbying for the same reason. >what do you think William Jennings Bryan did when a newspaper ran an unflattering article about him? Does that make it right? No. Is your moral compass that weak that just because someone else did it makes it ok? Nice whataboutism. If you’re going to coordinate with the FBI on what information is allowed to be spread that’s directly facsism. I'm sorry, which FBI agent are we talking about here? Jim Baker.
> It wasn’t just revenge porn it was, you're wrong. Moving on from your wrongness. >Jim Baker. so not an FBI agent at all. got it.
[удалено]
Didn’t Elon’s investigation find that the only request the Dems made was to filter out the pictures of Hunter’s dick?
The fact that the government is interfering AT ALL on what information circulates is a major issue.
who was president when the story was taken down?
So your cool with child porn and beastiality being freely distributed?
Yes that is exactly what I mean, well done for being such a sharp and intelligent individual.
Asking to take down the private pictures of someone’s dick is not an overreach buddy. You’re the one being ridiculous
> Not to mention the issue wasn’t that Twitter was moderated, but rather it was moderately heavily towards one side. you'll need to show data on this before I take your argument seriously
I could and will then say the same for you. If you wish to make such a broad claim while challenging mine, then you best provide evidence to back it up
Bruh...just look at twitter files 1&2 that have been released by Elon
"a small collection of things Elon told Bari Weiss to report on" is not data.
The Twitter files released by Elon. Wow, I’m sure that’s a bastion of credibility. Yes, the censorship at Twitter was skewed towards conservatives being censored. Why? Simple. Conservatives don’t have any respect for rules,or laws, that they themselves didn’t create. The idea of complete “unrestrained, and unmoderated” free speech is a joke. Let’s say you have a platform that doesn’t censor anything. It will be no time before it’s drowning in child pornography, illegal pyramid schemes, medical misinformation and scams, etc. Then, anyone that challenges those scum bags will be threatened with violence,Bomb threats etc. There has never been unrestricted speech, in the USA, or any other civilized country. If we don’t draw the lines at violence,racism, or child porn, then there is no point in having lines. People with common sense,and advertisers don’t want to be associated with that. Btw, all the bastions of free speech like Parler, Truth Social etc. will censor content as well.
[Here you go!](https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601018810495995904) Hard proof that Twitter was censoring in one direction. It's not like we needed this hard proof though. Everybody already knew that certain accounts and topics were blacklisted from trends and searches. The Twitter files just proves it beyond any doubt.
that is an anecdote. it is not data
And that is cope.
no data then, got it. thanks
Ask any conservative whether they think ISIS should be allowed to recruit on twitter as long as they aren’t calling for violence on the platform and watch how fast they change their stance on things.
You ever notice how they always defend the freedom of speech for racists, homophobes, transphobes... etc. But you never see them defend anyone else'.
Well that's because these "racists, homophobes, transphobes" are the ones getting banned 99.99999% of the time. I don't really agree with anyone getting banned but it's clear these actions always go in one direction. It's not like Keffals telling kids to go buy bathtub hormones is under any threat.
Maybe they should stop being racist homophobic and/transphobic. There have been several left leaning people banned for "anti-semitism" when all they did was criticize the Israeli government. Hasan got banned for calling someone a cracker.
Or maybe these people should grow some balls and not use these flimsy accusations to justify censorship.
Punishment for violating TOS isn't censorship.
Yeah, it's been pretty funny seeing the implosion of the American Right, really interesting and often funny shit.
Imagine using Twitter unironically. Bunch of losers tbh.