5 ms·

Why does an audit have a Twitter account? Can they not go through existing news media?

sarcasmatwork 5y ago
To easily relay information? "existing news media" is saying there is no such thing as voter fraud, so they are not covering it.
- mrguyorama 5y ago
  Would Fox News not at least cover it? Or newsmax, or OANN?
  - fdfdfdf 5y ago
    Oann covers it almost nightly. Full disclosure: I watch news for a living...lol...
kokanator 5y ago
Are you saying they don't have the right to have a twitter account? So much news today is actually prompted or pulled from twitter/social media. When the vast majority of media is left biased [0] it would be hard to have a decent amount of the population hear what you are finding. [0] https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=637508&p=4462444 https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=637508&p=4462444
- jsturges 5y ago
  Your source literally begins with "There is no completely clear answer to this question because there is no one exact methodology to measure and rate the partisan bias of news sources."
  - kokanator 5y ago
    Did you read the article or any of the references? Obviously there is no 'absolute' way but there are methods to assign a general bias.
- lolwuut1 5y ago
  Yes, I can see it being hard to get the “left wing media” to republish made up bullshit.
- rvz 5y ago
  > Are you saying they don't have the right to have a twitter account? Twitter probably now believes that @arizonaaudit has 'lost' this right. (You don't own your Twitter account anyway) But I'm sure even @arizonaaudit saw this coming in the first place. This is unsurprising since Twitter themselves have already admitted that they have a left-bias. From the CEO [0]: 'I fully admit our bias is more left-leaning'. They are obviously not the last but because this Twitter account leans from 'the other side', its fine to get rid of them from Twitter. /s Their platform, their guidelines, their rules. [0] https://thehill.com/policy/technology/402495-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-i-fully-admit-our-bias-is-more-left-leaning https://thehill.com/policy/technology/402495-twitter-ceo-jac...
  - kokanator 5y ago
    From the reference: "But the real question behind the question is, are we doing something according to political ideology or viewpoints? And we are not. Period," he added. So either he is full on lying or he thinks we are too stupid to understand the difference?
colpabar 5y ago
Would you ask that question of literally anything else? There are twitter accounts for all sorts of things. Agree with it or not, the AZ audit is a real thing that is happening in Arizona. It having a twitter account is in no way unusual. It's hard for me to believe that this account was suspended for any real "violation". I guess they will say that the people running the audit are spreading misinformation, but the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true, so isn't twitter taking a side here? Is that ok? I don't think so. If the audit has no basis in reality, as many claim, then it will fail. Why is it so dangerous to allow people to watch that happen?
- bellyfullofbac 5y ago
  > but the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true In the dictionary definition, yes. But the problem with this "audit" is filled with such corrupt cast of characters that their results can not be trusted. Sadly they're abusing the name of the process to be able to claim that their results will be authoritive. > If the audit has no basis in reality, as many claim, then it will fail. And who determines that it's a failure? An audit of the audit? Ironically them making a crooked "audit" allows them to be able to turn around and say the people auditing them are the crooked ones. A meta-audit also has to be financed, and the people living in reality-based world might not even be that bothered enough to do so, which results in this fake audit be the truth in the "alternative facts" half of the society. Not that I'm arguing that Twitter is right in banning them...
  - jimmygrapes 5y ago
    I don't know anything about this audit other than that someone is doing some kind of audit in Arizona regarding the 2020 U.S. election. Can you please clarify what you mean by people involved being untrustworthy, and/or other arguments against this process? I honestly fail to see any problem with auditing election results, since as far as I know there is no actual remedy regardless of the results, and it seems to me like verifying accurate results is a good thing. Of course if there is some corruption, fraud, or similar going on with ANY kind of auditor, I'd like to know.
StanislavPetrov 5y ago
>Can they not go through existing news media? Unfortunately "news" outlets are little more than publicity arms for political parties now, much like Twitter. There's a good reason why the majority of Americans don't trust the media. >The results go on to show that 59% of Americans said they agree with this statement: That “most news organizations are more concerned with supporting an ideology or political position than with informing the public.” And 61% of Americans think that “The media is not doing well at being objective and non-partisan.” https://www.forbes.com/sites/andymeek/2021/02/20/fewer-americans-than-ever-before-trust-the-mainstream-media/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/andymeek/2021/02/20/fewer-ameri...

To easily relay information? "existing news media" is saying there is no such thing as voter fraud, so they are not covering it.

mrguyorama 5y ago
Would Fox News not at least cover it? Or newsmax, or OANN?
- fdfdfdf 5y ago
  Oann covers it almost nightly. Full disclosure: I watch news for a living...lol...

kokanator 5y ago

Are you saying they don't have the right to have a twitter account? So much news today is actually prompted or pulled from twitter/social media. When the vast majority of media is left biased [0] it would be hard to have a decent amount of the population hear what you are finding. [0] https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=637508&p=4462444 https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=637508&p=4462444

jsturges 5y ago
Your source literally begins with "There is no completely clear answer to this question because there is no one exact methodology to measure and rate the partisan bias of news sources."
- kokanator 5y ago
  Did you read the article or any of the references? Obviously there is no 'absolute' way but there are methods to assign a general bias.
lolwuut1 5y ago
Yes, I can see it being hard to get the “left wing media” to republish made up bullshit.
rvz 5y ago
> Are you saying they don't have the right to have a twitter account? Twitter probably now believes that @arizonaaudit has 'lost' this right. (You don't own your Twitter account anyway) But I'm sure even @arizonaaudit saw this coming in the first place. This is unsurprising since Twitter themselves have already admitted that they have a left-bias. From the CEO [0]: 'I fully admit our bias is more left-leaning'. They are obviously not the last but because this Twitter account leans from 'the other side', its fine to get rid of them from Twitter. /s Their platform, their guidelines, their rules. [0] https://thehill.com/policy/technology/402495-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-i-fully-admit-our-bias-is-more-left-leaning https://thehill.com/policy/technology/402495-twitter-ceo-jac...
- kokanator 5y ago
  From the reference: "But the real question behind the question is, are we doing something according to political ideology or viewpoints? And we are not. Period," he added. So either he is full on lying or he thinks we are too stupid to understand the difference?

colpabar 5y ago

Would you ask that question of literally anything else? There are twitter accounts for all sorts of things. Agree with it or not, the AZ audit is a real thing that is happening in Arizona. It having a twitter account is in no way unusual. It's hard for me to believe that this account was suspended for any real "violation". I guess they will say that the people running the audit are spreading misinformation, but the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true, so isn't twitter taking a side here? Is that ok? I don't think so. If the audit has no basis in reality, as many claim, then it will fail. Why is it so dangerous to allow people to watch that happen?

bellyfullofbac 5y ago
> but the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true In the dictionary definition, yes. But the problem with this "audit" is filled with such corrupt cast of characters that their results can not be trusted. Sadly they're abusing the name of the process to be able to claim that their results will be authoritive. > If the audit has no basis in reality, as many claim, then it will fail. And who determines that it's a failure? An audit of the audit? Ironically them making a crooked "audit" allows them to be able to turn around and say the people auditing them are the crooked ones. A meta-audit also has to be financed, and the people living in reality-based world might not even be that bothered enough to do so, which results in this fake audit be the truth in the "alternative facts" half of the society. Not that I'm arguing that Twitter is right in banning them...
- jimmygrapes 5y ago
  I don't know anything about this audit other than that someone is doing some kind of audit in Arizona regarding the 2020 U.S. election. Can you please clarify what you mean by people involved being untrustworthy, and/or other arguments against this process? I honestly fail to see any problem with auditing election results, since as far as I know there is no actual remedy regardless of the results, and it seems to me like verifying accurate results is a good thing. Of course if there is some corruption, fraud, or similar going on with ANY kind of auditor, I'd like to know.

StanislavPetrov 5y ago

>Can they not go through existing news media? Unfortunately "news" outlets are little more than publicity arms for political parties now, much like Twitter. There's a good reason why the majority of Americans don't trust the media. >The results go on to show that 59% of Americans said they agree with this statement: That “most news organizations are more concerned with supporting an ideology or political position than with informing the public.” And 61% of Americans think that “The media is not doing well at being objective and non-partisan.” https://www.forbes.com/sites/andymeek/2021/02/20/fewer-americans-than-ever-before-trust-the-mainstream-media/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/andymeek/2021/02/20/fewer-ameri...