8 ms·
Twitter has applied warning labels to 37% of Trump's tweets since polls closed
- baby 6y agoIt is pretty unreal, something like 1 out of 4 of his tweet were hidden, at some point you'd think they would disable his account but that would probably put them in a dangerous position.
- zozin 6y agoThey'll likely disable his account on January 21, 2021 when he's no longer POTUS.
- krisgee 6y agoThe stance they've taken is that as President they won't ban or delete tweets because they're matters of record. There have been a lot of hints that after he's officially out the ban hammer is in play again.
- xnx 6y agoHas there been discussion of Twitter/Facebook using different techniques like tweet delays (quadratic backoff?)?
- ribble 6y agotwitters execs will be found guilty of colluding in sedition soon. payback is on the way.
- ffggvv 6y agohe should've taken meaningful action against tech company censorship. now they are officially incorporated as a wing of the DNC and republicans will never win another election.
- GenerocUsername 6y agoThe one post critical of censorship is fading. Ironic
- optimiz3 6y agoIf Fox News or MSNBC refuse to repeat something does that make it censorship too? What obligation do organizations have to promote someone's agenda?
- mynameishere 6y agoFYI, Fox News is controlled opposition. They were the first network to "call" Arizona long, long, long before it was over. Anyway, the electoral college and only the electoral college determines the outcome.
- gamblor956 6y agoFox News was not the "controlled oposition." Murdoch, the owner of Fox News, was Trump's original booster and Fox News's coverage of Trump's 2016 campaign is the reason Trump is even president. For the past four years, Fox News has essentially operated as the propaganda arm of the Trump White House. Trump had a direct line to the owner of Fox News. Half of the Fox News commentators were personal advisors to Trump.
- baby 6y agoI didn't see a criticism of censorship personally, what matters is the intent of the post.
- techer 6y agoOfficially incorporated?
- craftyguy 6y agoBecause, like donald's tweets, it's a lying sack of shit.
- mmastrac 6y agoHe's literally lying at this point and putting the democratic system of the US in jeopardy by saying he "won by a lot". Terminate his account. He doesn't have a right to post dangerous falsehoods on a third-party platform.
- baby 6y agoI'm wondering if there are any legal implications to the harm he's done, in terms of division and decreasing trust in the democracy.
- ttul 6y agoDorsey has said that much of what Trump says on the platform is newsworthy, and therefore Twitter allows it. Were they to suspend Trump’s account, it would necessarily be because his Tweets are no longer newsworthy. I can’t see that happening.
- mmastrac 6y agoI think once he's no longer president he'll have a very difficult time maintaining a Twitter account in good standing.
- curiousgal 6y ago> the democratic system of the US Talk about an oxymoron, eh?
- hnuser847 6y agoDid the Democrats put the democratic system at risk when they made unsubstantiated claims that Trump stole the election with the aid of a foreign power? Edit: Based the downvotes, I’ll take that as a no. When your team claims fraud, you’re protecting democracy. When the other team claims fraud, they’re destroying democracy. Got it.
- mynameishere 6y agoIt's enemy territory now, bud.
- aaron_m04 6y agoDoes that make a difference for most Trump supporters? I would expect that they'd be hearing about his pronouncements from Facebook or Fox News.
- ttul 6y agoTwitter provides an amplification of Trump’s falsehoods through the ease of retweeting. With the warnings, retweeting is impossible, which dampens the spread of misinformation. Every bit counts. The typical right wing only platforms don’t have the same reach as Twitter - not even close.
- halfjoking 6y agoI don't approve of any type of censorship. Don't care if it's neo-nazis, islamic jihadists, cult-like evangelical christians, militant atheists, or the President. All ideas should be allowed. Specific calls for action of violence/killing should be restricted, but Trump isn't doing that. I don't know why people think this is ok.
- pjc50 6y agoBannon went straight to calls for violence .. and got banned entirely.
- bJGVygG7MQVF8c 6y agolol spergs Bannon: "Keep it coming, stay on 'em — taking flak means you're over the target" Neue Yuork Tiems: "NEW: Steve Bannon calls for aerial bombardment of Democrat homes"
- pstuart 6y ago> All ideas should be allowed. Specific calls for action of violence/killing should be restricted Um...
- halfjoking 6y agoYou can say that gay lifestyles are against God's will (OK) without saying people should punish gays for being gay (BAD)... note that I am an atheist have neither of these beliefs it's just an example
- pstuart 6y agoIt gets blurry as to what is specifically a direct call for violence versus "plain old hate speech".
- _dibly 6y agoI'm all for nuance, but I can't imagine this being the hill people want to die on RE: censorship. As long as the calls for violence aren't overt we're cool with them? I might be in the minority but I don't have a problem lumping plain old hate speech in with inciting violence. I'm trying to imagine the best possible take on what Trump is trying to do by tweeting incendiary misinformation and I just can't get there.
- sergioro 6y agoTwitter also put a disclaimer on a U.S. Senator who was quoting Kentucky Democrat Ed Pritchard https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1324780605796716544?s=20 https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/132478060579671654... and blocked a tweet from @marklevinshow that merely articulated Art. II, §1, cl. 2 of the United States Constitution!
- pjc50 6y agoIt's entertaining how many posts that report the results of the election are getting flagged off the front page at the moment.
- thsowers 6y agoPolitics is generally considered off-topic on HN unless it's "evidence of some interesting new phenomenon"[0] [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- plosh_x11 6y agoI don't like what you are implying, I voted for Biden and I'm happy about the result and I DO NOT want to see these posts here. I come to HN to discuss tech with techies. I can have arguments about politics anywhere else on the net. They go sideways here just as quickly and they don't belong.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- callinOutLiars 6y agoWhy doesn’t your comment contradict itself? You say you don’t want to see posts or talk about it on here, but you obviously decided to go through the comments.
- villgax 6y agoNow would be a good time to suspend the account on numerous repeated violations. You've never seen any account which was given as much slack as this one.
- HungSu 6y agoAs POTUS his tweets are still matters of public record. More likely it will be locked in January.
- jungletime 6y agoFact is that mail in voting has been banned in European countries and elections overturned because its much easier to cheat. I would need more some statistical evidence. So far I have seen graphs pointing out how Biden's tally doesn't follow Benford’s Law. https://principia-scientific.com/joe-bidens-votes-violate-benfords-law-mathematics/ https://principia-scientific.com/joe-bidens-votes-violate-be... "Michigan County Clerk Admits Voting Software Glitch "Skewed" Results, Trump To Gain 6,000 Votes https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/michigan-county-clerk-admits-voting-software-glitch-skewed-results-trump-gain-6000-votes https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/michigan-county-clerk-adm... This is going to go in front of the Supreme Court. Twitter should not be trying to hide the fact that one of the parties claims fraud. A huge number of people voted for Trump. Let him make his case. My Gut instinct is that it is suspicious that some democratic counties got 90% turnout.
- sergioro 6y agoHere's some evidence of how the democrats are trying to steal the election: https://theredelephants.com/there-is-undeniable-mathematical-evidence-the-election-is-being-stolen/ https://theredelephants.com/there-is-undeniable-mathematical.... Hundreds of thousands of mail-in votes that arrive MI and WI at 4AM after election day and were just enough to change the outcome of the election. One of those mail-in ballot batches had 130,000+ votes, all of one candidate.
- thsowers 6y ago> One of those mail-in ballot batches had 130,000+ votes, all of one candidate. This is not true. Please provide a source, or stop spreading disinformation.
- sergioro 6y agoThis was reported by NYT, ABC news. Is well documented and web-archived. I witnessed the update of 130,000+ in favor of Biden in nytimes.com in November 4 at about 4AM.
- anonAndOn 6y agoI can think of two reasons why his account is not banned: 1) The tweets will be used as evidence in the upcoming litigation. Fines and/or jail are (likely?) in his future. 2) The public is likely to learn in real time of any no-good, really bad, horrible decisions on his way out the door.
- vaccinator 6y agoWhy is your post not hidden? Are you going to jail?
- telotortium 6y agoTwitter has confirmed that Trump's Twitter account will lose its special privileges re rule violations after he leaves office: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/11/06/twitter-wont-give-trump-special-treatment-post-presidency/6181794002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/11/06/twitter-wont-...
- ycombonator 6y ago@dang could you consider not allowing one sided political narrative on HN ?
- happytoexplain 6y agoIs this one-sided?
- disown 6y agoDoesn't that actually make his tweets stand out even more? Like how putting parental advisory warnings made a cd/album even more desirable. Or how a banned books list is a form of advertising and draws more interest to the banned books. And lets not forget the streisand effect. How many people are now actually going to trump's twitter just to view the "bad tweets" now? Everyone here understands the streisand effect/etc here but fail to see how it also applies to trump. Trump is literally using hate/opposition as a form of free advertising. He is using hate/opposition to drive traffic to his twitter account. It's unbelievable when you think about it.
- gamblor956 6y agoNo, because now the contents of the tweet are hidden until you explicitly choose to view them rather than just showing up unsolicited, and more importantly, because tweets flagged in this manner no longer show up in feeds. You would have to visit his twitter account to even know that the tweets exist, and you would have to click on each tweet individually to view it, and to waive the warning label, so you would already have to have the intent to view them. Thus, the Streisand Effect doesn't apply.
- disown 6y ago> Thus, the Streisand Effect doesn't apply. Must be why we are not talking about it.