5 ms·

You almost have to admire the total ruthlessness of republican operatives. By constantly playing on the offensive, they've put Facebook and Twitter on a consta

by Fede_V 8y ago

You almost have to admire the total ruthlessness of republican operatives. By constantly playing on the offensive, they've put Facebook and Twitter on a constantly defensive posture worried about being called out as having 'liberal bias'. The fact that Jack had to personally intervene to stop his employees from banning Alex Jones (after numerous egregious violations) speaks to the power of this approach.

qubax 8y ago
> By constantly playing on the offensive, they've put Facebook and Twitter on a constantly defensive posture worried about being called out as having 'liberal bias'. Jack Dorsey and Zuckerburg said their company had liberal bias. We know google does. > The fact that Jack had to personally intervene to stop his employees from banning Alex Jones (after numerous egregious violations) speaks to the power of this approach. Alex Jones got banned anyways. For things far more benign than say what sarah jeong wrote. Stop it. It's been proven that there is bias. The only question is what, if anything, should be done about it. What's with the blatant dishonesty here? How can there be an honest discussion when people outright lie?
- dmix 8y ago
  For anyone needing a source regarding @Jack: > Twitter is so liberal that its conservative employees ‘don’t feel safe to express their opinions,’ says CEO Jack Dorsey https://www.recode.net/2018/9/14/17857622/twitter-liberal-employees-conservative-trump-politics https://www.recode.net/2018/9/14/17857622/twitter-liberal-em... There is no way this hasn't trickled down to their moderation and banning policies.
  - komali2 8y ago
    >“They do feel silenced by just the general swirl of what they perceive to be the broader percentage of leanings within the company, and I don’t think that’s fair or right.” I can't think of any reasonable solution to the problem as I see it: San Francisco is a city full of liberals, Twitter HQ is in San Francisco, therefore Twitter is full of liberals. I guess Twitter could try to import people from like Utah, but that may not work because they might just end up importing more liberals (tech workers willing to move to SF). Also, it's not necessarily Twitter's job to equalize the political beliefs of a city. They can't ask "are you liberal or conservative" on an application, it's currently comically illegal and also I'd say horribly unethical and therefore should not be made legal. Therefore, I think the only solution is the exact one that's in place - if a person at work feels threatened for any reason, they should be allowed to get a resolution, either via HR or the law if need be. That being said, "everyone else has a different political opinion than me" doesn't necessarily seem threatening to me, and I say that as a declared liberal that grew up in the deep South. I'd be very interested in learning more about why the Twitter employees that presumably reached out to Dorsey feel uncomfortable expressing their opinions.
    - Fede_V 8y ago
      Tech employees are, as a group: - Highly educated - Young - High % of foreign citizens - Urban - Wealthy If you take the general population and control for those covariates, you end up with a subpopulation that massively skews left. For example - the median age for people watching Fox news is nearly 70.
      - komali2 8y ago
        Right, so, not sure what exactly Twitter is supposed to do about it. I'm trying to think of some sort of affirmative action parallel, but unlike other protected classes, political disposition is a choice. The closest protected class I can think of is religion, which arguably is as much a choice as political disposition... But in any case, if someone is passed over for promotion or not hired or somehow damaged for their political leanings, they already can sue over it. I guess I'm having a hard time being conviced there's an actual problem here.
thrower123 8y ago
Twitter at least is obvious and unapolagetic in their censoring. Alex Jones and Milo are trolls, sure. But it was enlightening seeing James Woods silenced this week.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- spangry 8y ago
  FYI, this is the tweet that got him locked out of his account: https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/woods%20tweet%201.jpg https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
goblekitepe 8y ago
The profound issue here is that Alex Jones' supposed rule violations are far more tame than many things that liberal leaning individuals have shared on Twitter against Trump, Republicans, etc. There is not equal application of the rules, they are applied in a biased manner.
- komali2 8y ago
  Do you have evidence for this? What I've seen is that typically a banned conservative will do something like target someone without the resources to defend themselves (for example, Alex Jones calling children that are victims of a mass shooting "crisis actors"), whereas hordes of liberal citizens voicing their distaste of Trump is just How It Be To Be President. I would love to see evidence contrary. I report violent comments no matter the target and Twitter is good about sending a message back about action taken, and I've yet to notice a trend.
  - goblekitepe 8y ago
    Jones never even said that, that's the problem. The media created a false narrative and spread it. He specifically said that people who were interviewed after the shooting were crisis actors. Who cares the specifics of what he said though? It's distasteful, but if distasteful speech is grounds to ban someone then most of Twitter should be banned. And the evidence is that James Woods, Alex Jones and others have been banned because of political speech while similarly high profile Leftist commentators who post inflammatory things have not been banned.
    - komali2 8y ago
      He repeatedly argued that not only was the shooting a hoax, the victims (who include people interviewed), were crisis actors. He did this so much that the victims were getting stalked and receiving death threats. https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-45358890 https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-45358890 I'm sorry, I'd love to participate in this discussion with you but "similarly high profile leftist commentators (who?) Who post inflammatory things (what?) is just not enough evidence to convince me of anything.

by Fede_V 8y ago

qubax 8y ago

> By constantly playing on the offensive, they've put Facebook and Twitter on a constantly defensive posture worried about being called out as having 'liberal bias'. Jack Dorsey and Zuckerburg said their company had liberal bias. We know google does. > The fact that Jack had to personally intervene to stop his employees from banning Alex Jones (after numerous egregious violations) speaks to the power of this approach. Alex Jones got banned anyways. For things far more benign than say what sarah jeong wrote. Stop it. It's been proven that there is bias. The only question is what, if anything, should be done about it. What's with the blatant dishonesty here? How can there be an honest discussion when people outright lie?

dmix 8y ago
For anyone needing a source regarding @Jack: > Twitter is so liberal that its conservative employees ‘don’t feel safe to express their opinions,’ says CEO Jack Dorsey https://www.recode.net/2018/9/14/17857622/twitter-liberal-employees-conservative-trump-politics https://www.recode.net/2018/9/14/17857622/twitter-liberal-em... There is no way this hasn't trickled down to their moderation and banning policies.
- komali2 8y ago
  >“They do feel silenced by just the general swirl of what they perceive to be the broader percentage of leanings within the company, and I don’t think that’s fair or right.” I can't think of any reasonable solution to the problem as I see it: San Francisco is a city full of liberals, Twitter HQ is in San Francisco, therefore Twitter is full of liberals. I guess Twitter could try to import people from like Utah, but that may not work because they might just end up importing more liberals (tech workers willing to move to SF). Also, it's not necessarily Twitter's job to equalize the political beliefs of a city. They can't ask "are you liberal or conservative" on an application, it's currently comically illegal and also I'd say horribly unethical and therefore should not be made legal. Therefore, I think the only solution is the exact one that's in place - if a person at work feels threatened for any reason, they should be allowed to get a resolution, either via HR or the law if need be. That being said, "everyone else has a different political opinion than me" doesn't necessarily seem threatening to me, and I say that as a declared liberal that grew up in the deep South. I'd be very interested in learning more about why the Twitter employees that presumably reached out to Dorsey feel uncomfortable expressing their opinions.
  - Fede_V 8y ago
    Tech employees are, as a group: - Highly educated - Young - High % of foreign citizens - Urban - Wealthy If you take the general population and control for those covariates, you end up with a subpopulation that massively skews left. For example - the median age for people watching Fox news is nearly 70.
    - komali2 8y ago
      Right, so, not sure what exactly Twitter is supposed to do about it. I'm trying to think of some sort of affirmative action parallel, but unlike other protected classes, political disposition is a choice. The closest protected class I can think of is religion, which arguably is as much a choice as political disposition... But in any case, if someone is passed over for promotion or not hired or somehow damaged for their political leanings, they already can sue over it. I guess I'm having a hard time being conviced there's an actual problem here.

thrower123 8y ago

Twitter at least is obvious and unapolagetic in their censoring. Alex Jones and Milo are trolls, sure. But it was enlightening seeing James Woods silenced this week.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
spangry 8y ago
FYI, this is the tweet that got him locked out of his account: https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/woods%20tweet%201.jpg https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

goblekitepe 8y ago

The profound issue here is that Alex Jones' supposed rule violations are far more tame than many things that liberal leaning individuals have shared on Twitter against Trump, Republicans, etc. There is not equal application of the rules, they are applied in a biased manner.

komali2 8y ago
Do you have evidence for this? What I've seen is that typically a banned conservative will do something like target someone without the resources to defend themselves (for example, Alex Jones calling children that are victims of a mass shooting "crisis actors"), whereas hordes of liberal citizens voicing their distaste of Trump is just How It Be To Be President. I would love to see evidence contrary. I report violent comments no matter the target and Twitter is good about sending a message back about action taken, and I've yet to notice a trend.
- goblekitepe 8y ago
  Jones never even said that, that's the problem. The media created a false narrative and spread it. He specifically said that people who were interviewed after the shooting were crisis actors. Who cares the specifics of what he said though? It's distasteful, but if distasteful speech is grounds to ban someone then most of Twitter should be banned. And the evidence is that James Woods, Alex Jones and others have been banned because of political speech while similarly high profile Leftist commentators who post inflammatory things have not been banned.
  - komali2 8y ago
    He repeatedly argued that not only was the shooting a hoax, the victims (who include people interviewed), were crisis actors. He did this so much that the victims were getting stalked and receiving death threats. https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-45358890 https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-45358890 I'm sorry, I'd love to participate in this discussion with you but "similarly high profile leftist commentators (who?) Who post inflammatory things (what?) is just not enough evidence to convince me of anything.