oblong Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 4 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Still waiting. My understanding is that newspapers and outlets have pretty broad latitude to publish or broadcast news as they see fit. pro tip: They do libel and slander laws are heavily in their favor. The only thing I can think of is over the air networks can't say certain words or show certain things but on CNN/Fox, that's self regulated by the industry, not the government. CNN can show some tits and say Fuck and the gubmint can't do a damn thing about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 7 hours ago, ewsieg said: I’d love to know what misinformation you claim I’m making. Certainly can understand someone not a agreeing with my opinion, but what misinformation am I spreading? The first and most obvious was calling twitter a monopoly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 20 minutes ago, chasfh said: Even as a percent of users who do use the platform for news or news headlines, Facebook is the equivalent (52/71 = 74%) of Twitter (16/23 = 73%), plus FB has the raw numbers. Of course, we can also debate just how much content of each platform actually constitutes “news” … The platforms for the most part really aren't "news" imo... they are basically tools for big content generators (ie. In the news space, local and national news outlets, journalists, etc.) to more broadly disseminate their message, and for non-content generators, they are a big news aggregator. Not unlike Facebook or Reddit or other sites, just in a different format. The question then becomes, should these platforms have any discretion in what is disseminated on their platform. Seems like the answer should be yes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 (edited) 20 minutes ago, oblong said: pro tip: They do libel and slander laws are heavily in their favor. The only thing I can think of is over the air networks can't say certain words or show certain things but on CNN/Fox, that's self regulated by the industry, not the government. CNN can show some tits and say Fuck and the gubmint can't do a damn thing about it. I know there is regulation on swearing and nudity (old enough to remember the Janet Jackson boob-gate Super Bowl lol), but in terms of information or balance or anything like that, they have all the latitude. That's sort of why pointing to the Times and Post to suggest that Twitter be regulated doesn't make sense to me. If Marjorie Taylor Greene submits an op-ed to the Washington Post discussing the Jewish space lasers' role in the 2020 election, they are under no obligation to publish it. If the Times decides they don't want to publish Ross Douthat anymore, they are under no obligation to keep him employed (contractual obligations notwithstanding). To that end, why should Twitter be obligated to allow Nick Fuentes or Baked Alaska or even Donald Trump onto the platform, particularly as each were repeatedly in violation of the platforms TOS? Edited February 10, 2023 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 8 minutes ago, mtutiger said: I know there is regulation on swearing and nudity (old enough to remember the Janet Jackson boob-gate Super Bowl lol), but in terms of information or balance or anything like that, they have all the latitude. That's sort of why pointing to the Times and Post to suggest that Twitter be regulated doesn't make sense to me. If Marjorie Taylor Greene submits an op-ed to the Washington Post discussing the Jewish space lasers' role in the 2020 election, they are under no obligation to publish it. If the Times decides they don't want to publish Ross Douthat anymore, they are under no obligation to keep him employed (contractual obligations notwithstanding). To that end, why should Twitter be obligated to allow Nick Fuentes or Baked Alaska or even Donald Trump onto the platform, particularly as each were repeatedly in violation of the platforms TOS? I don't how drastically things have changed in recent years. But entities like Fox and CNN are basically cable as opposed to stations that air programs from say CBS, NBC, Fox (local stations, the Simpson, NFL games) over the air. FCC regs at one time regulated what they considered "offensive" content like nudity and profane language. Cable isn't covered legally if I remember correctly. Going back to the dark ages, Morning Zoos walked a finer line than say shows on satellite stations like XM and Sirius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 I look forward to the Twitter File on this episode lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 So, creepy Space Karen doesn't want Ukraine to use Starlink. Who loaned him all that money to buy Twitter? How much dirt do they keep on him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screwball Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 No company the size of Twitter, or Tesla, does jack shit without being funded, lawyered (maybe not a word), and advised by Wall Street. BAC is one, and many of the other usual suspects are involved as well in some capacity. They do, after all, own the place. We are just pawns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 The female nazi George Santos is kinda good looking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Clearly another example of how political bias on Twitter is the biggest issue the platform faces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 23 hours ago, romad1 said: The female nazi George Santos is kinda good looking. She actually appears to have actively courted the Trump endorsement by being a cheesecake ho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screwball Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Funny, the WaPo runs a hit piece on this woman a day after she shreds Yoel Roth, chief censor for Twitter, in congressional testimony. Apparently anyone questioning censorship is a nazi whore and should be attacked in the press. Orwell is laughing in his grave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 That’s not censorship. Not even close. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screwball Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 If you are referring to Roth and Twitter - all I can say is - bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Censorship is the government ordering someone to not publish something. That didn’t happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screwball Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 That's exactly what happened. You should find another echo chamber to live in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 18 hours ago, romad1 said: She actually appears to have actively courted the Trump endorsement by being a cheesecake ho. I think she is very stunning but it remains to be seen if she's prepared to be a legislator by appearing in Maxim magazine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 (edited) She appears to have the endorsement of the Church of the AR-15. Edited February 12, 2023 by romad1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 It is incredible that the Republicans used the FBI to censor twitter and are now having hearings about how the Republicans used the FBI to censor twitter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 51 minutes ago, pfife said: It is incredible that the Republicans used the FBI to censor twitter and are now having hearings about how the Republicans used the FBI to censor twitter They also seem very interested in a laptop that has been through the forensic equivalent of every whorehouse from Cairo to Cancun and not in the President fighting to keep classified documents while not in office. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 They are comparing censorship war stories Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted February 13, 2023 Author Share Posted February 13, 2023 On 2/9/2023 at 11:32 AM, Tiger337 said: I didn't see a big problem with Twitter pre Musk and I don't see one now. Twitter has never come close to the problem that Fox News and many news sites are. It only became a problem because they banned king Donald and now it must be destroyed. I maintain three Twitter accounts: one for SABR baseball stuff, one to follow news, and one to follow entertainment and media and pop culture stuff. I like to keep the three silos of information separated and distinct. All three of them had Musk’s tweet about people believing the press in the For You. I had never interacted with him, his tweets, or anyone who ever retweeted him, not even once, not even the news account. Yet the tweet just showed up. That’s a little bit of a problem, I think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.