4 ms·

No, the Hunter Biden story was "wiped from everywhere" because it was part illegal (the authentic parts, if they were indeed authentic, would likely have violat

by hnbad 6y ago

No, the Hunter Biden story was "wiped from everywhere" because it was part illegal (the authentic parts, if they were indeed authentic, would likely have violated revenge porn laws in addition to Facebook's ToS on nudity), part misinformation and part (and this is probably the least important) character assassination. It also wasn't a very successful "wipe" if the story got coverage in various mainstream media. It wasn't a very successful smear campaign because as it turns out, saying "your son may have done an illegal sex thing while on drugs" isn't a very effective smear against someone running against an incumbent who has had credible scandals ticking every one of those boxes himself. You also need to get out of the headspace where you think Biden is "left wing" just because Trump or Modi is so extremely right wing. If you want to see "left wing" criticism on Facebook it's not about Hunter Biden, it's about things like the ("alleged") Uyghur genocide or the portrayal of socialist governments. Biden isn't a socialist, he's a centrist moderate leaning towards fiscal conservatism with some moderately progressive social policies. Even relative to the US population he's barely "left wing". His appeal was literally that he plans to "reach across the isle" and "unite" with Republicans (who, for the record, have shown no such interest themselves). Neither is Facebook, by the way. While Facebook has cracked down on right-wing disinfo campaigns after they gained massive traction after 2016, they've also cracked down hard on socialist accounts and groups, often with no recourse and no clear explanation of which parts of the ToS they allegedly violated. Meanwhile they cozied up to Republican politicians during the Trump era and there have been leaked conversations and memos indicating Zuckerberg & co intentionally pushing for a more right-wing slant to offset the employees' supposed liberal bias. I'm not in support of Facebook wiping "the Hunter Biden story", I'm in support of Facebook enforcing its ToS. But they need to do so transparently and objectively. They aren't doing that, though, and that's a problem. But it doesn't only impact "the right". The right is just more likely to see their own being banned over bannable offenses like explicitly racist remarks and calls to violence and portray it as "censoring conservatives".

zpeti 6y ago
A story about hunter biden is not the same as the material itself, which might have been illegal. Just like obtaining and publishing Trump's tax returns were illegal, but talking about it isn't, and they most certainly weren't wiped from Facebook and Twitter. Which is an extremely easy example of just what double standards there were during the election. Also - how do you know it was illegal? Has a court ruled so? Are you basically expecting Facebook and Twitter to know what and what isn't illegal in real time, and act upon that? To know what a court might rule before there's even been a court case? What your suggesting is ridiculous.
- hnbad 6y ago
  > obtaining and publishing Trump's tax returns were illegal > how do you know it was illegal? Has a court ruled so? Are you basically expecting Facebook and Twitter to know what and what isn't illegal in real time, and act upon that? To know what a court might rule before there's even been a court case? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ PS: If you don't see the difference between yellow press trying to create a moral panic over a candidate's son engaging in behavior the incumbent has been documented to have engaged in himself, and news sites covering a candidate's tax returns which were leaked after the candidate spent years claiming he wanted to publish them but couldn't for legal reasons, I have nothing to say to you. I don't even like Biden but its pretty clear the most tangible criticism based on the Hunter Biden laptop situation was that the leaked sex tapes were previously used to blackmail the candidate, which clearly ceased to be relevant the instance they were published unless the claim was that this had influenced his actions as a VP, which none of these sites dared to assert.
  - pessimizer 6y ago
    > If you don't see the difference between yellow press trying to create a moral panic over a candidate's son engaging in behavior the incumbent has been documented to have engaged in himself, and news sites covering a candidate's tax returns which were leaked after the candidate spent years claiming he wanted to publish them but couldn't for legal reasons, I have nothing to say to you. You should try. Painting an argument as reprehensible to make while giving the impression that argument is simple to counter by people who are not bad or stupider than you is not a good habit. Is there some premise that people have to share with you in be worth having a discussion with? Is it too much to ask for you to make that premise explicit? Why would you cite the extensive coverage of Trump's every breath and typo as a reason not to cover Hunter Biden? What does a shrug emoticon add? I don't understand your argument. Biden has been accused of family-related corruption. What do Trump's ultimately completely un-notable taxes (other than the massive tax refund given to him by the Obama administration after the housing derivative bubble burst) have to do with Biden's son?
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  The Hunter Biden story violated Twitter's ToS doxxing rules at the time, by including his personal email address which was specifically mentioned in the rules. To my knowledge, Trump's tax returns may seem comparably personal but didn't include any of the identifying information to get them flagged. That was Twitter's justification at least. I think they mishandled the situation terribly, and they somewhat agree by their ToS change after the event.
zpeti 6y ago
Thoughts? https://www.zerohedge.com/political/twitter-promotes-conservative-doxxing-article-based-hacked-materials-violating-own-policy https://www.zerohedge.com/political/twitter-promotes-conserv...

by hnbad 6y ago

zpeti 6y ago

A story about hunter biden is not the same as the material itself, which might have been illegal. Just like obtaining and publishing Trump's tax returns were illegal, but talking about it isn't, and they most certainly weren't wiped from Facebook and Twitter. Which is an extremely easy example of just what double standards there were during the election. Also - how do you know it was illegal? Has a court ruled so? Are you basically expecting Facebook and Twitter to know what and what isn't illegal in real time, and act upon that? To know what a court might rule before there's even been a court case? What your suggesting is ridiculous.

hnbad 6y ago
> obtaining and publishing Trump's tax returns were illegal > how do you know it was illegal? Has a court ruled so? Are you basically expecting Facebook and Twitter to know what and what isn't illegal in real time, and act upon that? To know what a court might rule before there's even been a court case? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ PS: If you don't see the difference between yellow press trying to create a moral panic over a candidate's son engaging in behavior the incumbent has been documented to have engaged in himself, and news sites covering a candidate's tax returns which were leaked after the candidate spent years claiming he wanted to publish them but couldn't for legal reasons, I have nothing to say to you. I don't even like Biden but its pretty clear the most tangible criticism based on the Hunter Biden laptop situation was that the leaked sex tapes were previously used to blackmail the candidate, which clearly ceased to be relevant the instance they were published unless the claim was that this had influenced his actions as a VP, which none of these sites dared to assert.
- pessimizer 6y ago
  > If you don't see the difference between yellow press trying to create a moral panic over a candidate's son engaging in behavior the incumbent has been documented to have engaged in himself, and news sites covering a candidate's tax returns which were leaked after the candidate spent years claiming he wanted to publish them but couldn't for legal reasons, I have nothing to say to you. You should try. Painting an argument as reprehensible to make while giving the impression that argument is simple to counter by people who are not bad or stupider than you is not a good habit. Is there some premise that people have to share with you in be worth having a discussion with? Is it too much to ask for you to make that premise explicit? Why would you cite the extensive coverage of Trump's every breath and typo as a reason not to cover Hunter Biden? What does a shrug emoticon add? I don't understand your argument. Biden has been accused of family-related corruption. What do Trump's ultimately completely un-notable taxes (other than the massive tax refund given to him by the Obama administration after the housing derivative bubble burst) have to do with Biden's son?
boomboomsubban 6y ago
The Hunter Biden story violated Twitter's ToS doxxing rules at the time, by including his personal email address which was specifically mentioned in the rules. To my knowledge, Trump's tax returns may seem comparably personal but didn't include any of the identifying information to get them flagged. That was Twitter's justification at least. I think they mishandled the situation terribly, and they somewhat agree by their ToS change after the event.

zpeti 6y ago

Thoughts? https://www.zerohedge.com/political/twitter-promotes-conservative-doxxing-article-based-hacked-materials-violating-own-policy https://www.zerohedge.com/political/twitter-promotes-conserv...