4 ms·

Twitter has made themselves clear on this. They're going to censor content they don't like, even in direct communications. Use another platform if you don't li

Twitter has made themselves clear on this. They're going to censor content they don't like, even in direct communications. Use another platform if you don't like it. If you can't do that because all of the content producers and your friends have decided that twitter's level of censorship is ok, then you're just out of step with the rest of society. It's like complaining that Coca Cola is an evil company and you hate them. If everyone else but you still likes Coke then your view on their practices, however valid it may be, won't be relevant

zaroth 6y ago
It’s totally fine by me if they want to take on the legal liability of being a publisher. I think it goes against the stated purpose and core mission of their platform. So perhaps they are lying to their users, and even to themselves. > The mission we serve as Twitter, Inc. is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly without barriers. Our business and revenue will always follow that mission in ways that improve – and do not detract from – a free and global conversation. It also may be an illegal campaign contribution in some cases.
- hooande 6y ago
  wouldn't this leave you in a worse situation? say twitter becomes a publisher (whatever that means) and gets sued out of business. then you still won't be able to follow @NYPost or retweet content to followers. I'm curious, how do you think twitter becoming a publisher would help you to accomplish your stated goals?
  - username90 6y ago
    Twitter can't afford to become a publisher, so if the law didn't let them do what they do now without being a publisher it would force them to stop. Currently they get to eat and keep the cookie.
    - heurist 6y ago
      Twitter and Facebook are in a no-win situation. Remove this content and they are punished by the right removing section 230 protections. Allow it and the left calls them destructive monopolies and breaks them apart. It seems they have chosen to halt the spread of murky 'October surprise' claims on their platforms rather than repeat the course of October 2016. I can't blame them (and agree with their decision).
      - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
        > Remove this content and they are punished by the right removing section 230 protections. Allow it and the left calls them destructive monopolies and breaks them apart. This seems to suggest a larger solution -- that these platforms do actually have within their power to implement. Stop helping those two bickering ninnies by taking sides, and instead use the huge bullhorn society has handed them by screaming, "Shut up the both of you, stop bickering and maybe help the people you were elected to help!" Who is right and about what are always less important than simply helping people. There is SO MUCH that is being left undone because we endlessly want to debate single issues for literally DECADES while people die in the streets. Leadership was abandoned long ago and these gigantic bully pulpits could right the ship and instead they are being used as game pieces by their partisan owners. It's... sad to watch.

zaroth 6y ago

It’s totally fine by me if they want to take on the legal liability of being a publisher. I think it goes against the stated purpose and core mission of their platform. So perhaps they are lying to their users, and even to themselves. > The mission we serve as Twitter, Inc. is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly without barriers. Our business and revenue will always follow that mission in ways that improve – and do not detract from – a free and global conversation. It also may be an illegal campaign contribution in some cases.

hooande 6y ago
wouldn't this leave you in a worse situation? say twitter becomes a publisher (whatever that means) and gets sued out of business. then you still won't be able to follow @NYPost or retweet content to followers. I'm curious, how do you think twitter becoming a publisher would help you to accomplish your stated goals?
- username90 6y ago
  Twitter can't afford to become a publisher, so if the law didn't let them do what they do now without being a publisher it would force them to stop. Currently they get to eat and keep the cookie.
  - heurist 6y ago
    Twitter and Facebook are in a no-win situation. Remove this content and they are punished by the right removing section 230 protections. Allow it and the left calls them destructive monopolies and breaks them apart. It seems they have chosen to halt the spread of murky 'October surprise' claims on their platforms rather than repeat the course of October 2016. I can't blame them (and agree with their decision).
    - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
      > Remove this content and they are punished by the right removing section 230 protections. Allow it and the left calls them destructive monopolies and breaks them apart. This seems to suggest a larger solution -- that these platforms do actually have within their power to implement. Stop helping those two bickering ninnies by taking sides, and instead use the huge bullhorn society has handed them by screaming, "Shut up the both of you, stop bickering and maybe help the people you were elected to help!" Who is right and about what are always less important than simply helping people. There is SO MUCH that is being left undone because we endlessly want to debate single issues for literally DECADES while people die in the streets. Leadership was abandoned long ago and these gigantic bully pulpits could right the ship and instead they are being used as game pieces by their partisan owners. It's... sad to watch.