5 ms·
I'm really not outraged by that fact that twitter burst the Donald Trump info bubble, but the fact that they don't do the same thing when a member of an opposit
by orwin 6y ago
I'm really not outraged by that fact that twitter burst the Donald Trump info bubble, but the fact that they don't do the same thing when a member of an opposite party is also partial with the truth is a bad sign. Tbh they should have started with a controversial anti-trump statement before enforcing this in trump.
Also they should not have called that "fact checking" or "debunking".
- sp332 6y agoWhat's a better word?
- swebs 6y ago"Rebuttal" would work better. Calling it a fact check implies "I'm right, you're wrong. The debate is over."
- dbbk 6y agoCalling it a fact check implies that there are facts. Facts are real things, they are not up for debate.
- robertlagrant 6y agoThis is silly. Everyone knows there are facts. What you're replying to assumes this already.
- shadowgovt 6y ago> Everyone knows there are facts. The notion of "post-truth politics" is one of the major issues of the day. "Everyone knows there are facts" is not actually a given in modern discourse.
- raziel2p 6y agoAs it should be, with a fact check (at least if the fact is demonstrably false). "Debates" (insofar as that concept even exists on a platform like Twitter) started on false grounds should not be allowed to continue. If I make a claim "A, therefore B, therefore C", and A is demonstrably false, I'm not going to insist we keep discussing B and C for the sake of not "ending the debate". I should be forced to either concede or find a new line of reasoning.
- hobs 6y agoWhy? Trump's absolutely the reason for the need here - politicians have always lied, but it would probably be more useful if twitter or anyone marked when he was telling the truth; you'd have a much smaller dataset to manage.