I'm always baffled at the silence of the fake free speech absolutists when 'ye is oppressed, whether by the old twitter regime or the new one. A real free speech absolutist would speak up no matter how offensive the content or objectionable the character of the speaker.
Given the amount of pressure coming from Europe (where the 1st amendment isn’t really a thing), I’m not surprised Elon had to give in with the Star of David / Swaztika post.
I’m curious if the ramblings of an obvious insane person actually hurt anyone’s feelings. Personally, I quite enjoyed watching the spectacle unfold in real-time. Poor Chris Paul.
Given the amount of pressure coming from Europe (where the 1st amendment isn’t really a thing), I’m not surprised Elon had to give in with the Star of David / Swaztika post.
I’m curious if the ramblings of an obvious insane person actually hurt anyone’s feelings. Personally, I quite enjoyed watching the spectacle unfold in real-time. Poor Chris Paul.
Still waiting for one of our fake free speech absolutists to stand up for 'ye's rights.
Not being allowed to lie on twitter is definitely the end of civilization, I think we can all agree.
Twitter gets to decide who uses their soap box why and how.
You dont get that ?
Bet if it was a baker denying a wedding cake to ...
What is the difference ?
The NY Post has forfeited any right to be considered a newspaper. It is a propaganda organ. Like Pravda in the old days. Think of twitter as suppressing Pravda. Oh the outrage.
Well what can I say. OM has broken me.
It is worth noting that the "reporter" the Post is using for this Biden bombshell has no prior bylines for them and most recently been employed by Hannity.
I personally don't have a view one way or another on these decisions by twitter. But if they censor propaganda, then there is some sort of rough karmic justice. A sort of proof that there is a God lurking out there somewhere in the cosmos. That's how I see it.
have the pee tapes gotten a thumbs up or down in official circles?
seems the only people still debating their merit are the MAGA
the rest of the world has moved on pretty much ... well pretty much
The Select Senate Subcommittee did concur that Russia with the aid of the Trump campaign interfered in 2016.
/////////
Begging the age old question,
"What propaganda ?"
cen·sorship
/ˈsensərSHip/
noun
1.
the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
"the regulation imposes censorship on all media"
2.
(in ancient Rome) the office or position of censor.
"he celebrated a triumph together with his father and they held the censorship jointly"
////////////////////////////////////
Asking, is this discussion centered around a misunderstanding of the word "censorship" ?
My reading is this is an official/legal term
Governments - laws impose censorship. not media outlets or the refusal to share a soap box
Again, I am asking
he still in here crying that people can't lie and spread propaganda
and trying to act like free speech is under attack cause twitter and others are like
"yeah, nah bruh"
lol
Here's my opinion: what twitter did had very little to do with viewpoint discrimination (an actual form of censorship) and very much to do with trying to run a successful business (i.e. "our users already refer to us as a 'hellsite'; we need to do something to avoid becoming the cesspool that every rational person perceives facebook as"). I'm not sure they are going about that goal very successfully, but what do I know. Asking whether I "support" this is a nonsense question because who cares.
it is an unfortunate thing that by coincidence any effort to weed out disinformation in today's environment also corresponds to viewpoint discrimination
i don't view this as twitter's problem
i do think that people from that particular viewpoint should spend some time contemplating whether the widespread propagation of disinformation should continue to be part of their toolkit
any enforcement against propaganda and disinformation will be inherently unfair to parties that rely heavily on propaganda and disinformation to advance their causes
i can see why some posters around here would get bent out of shape over that, and why they would try to draw an equivalence between the Times/very poorly chosen one's taxes and the Post/Hunter's "email"
Because it's part of a fake narrative aided by hostile foreign countries. The story about how they got it has more holes than swiss cheese. The people pushing it like Giuliani have already been discredited and literally had a Russian agent on his podcast. Maybe you could explain to me what's stopping anyone from claiming a harddrive was Hunter Bidens and creating a bunch of fake emails? We have no way of verifying the authenticity and the people bringing it forward have less than zero credibility. That's what makes it propoganda.