3 ms·

Your evidence for Twitter having less reach is that they aren’t included in FAANG? Twitter’s reach aside, they’re more powerful than Facebook given that they ar

Your evidence for Twitter having less reach is that they aren’t included in FAANG? Twitter’s reach aside, they’re more powerful than Facebook given that they aren’t politically neutral. Facebook may not be politically neutral either, but they at least attempt to be. Twitter on the other hand has clearly picked a side and does not hide it. In fact, they often flaunt it by applying rules to only certain types of accounts. It doesn’t take any effort to see this.

dTal 5y ago
The FAANG thing was just a reference to the fact that Facebook's userbase is vastly larger than Twitter's - and that's before we even get into WhatsApp and Instagram. Facebook is the social network and nothing else comes close. Twitter's a sideshow. A business is wayyyy more likely to have an official Facebook page than an official Twitter account. Regarding "politics", I think publicly displaying some principles is preferable to the faux-neutrality with secret behind-the-scenes tinkering that Facebook does. It gives me the willies.
rektide 5y ago
This is a weird out there view that, to me, sounds like it's coming from someone who wants to feel injured. Twitter's own research shows they have more broadly amplified the right than the left. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28953427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28953427 I for one could not be less shocked. You (and temp8964) are engaged in, in my view, conspiratorial minded thinking. You imagine some great vast system working against a view. It's just not so. Governing a platform is hard, keeping things on the rails is hard. Not every decision is easy & clean & obvious. Taking the conspiratorial minded view, saying- this is not a democratic platform, this doesn't allow open conversation, is working against me- seems patently clearly obviously heinously untrue. To try to grind an axe over this is, to me, bogus. There's no evidence, no claim I can possibly imagine that justifies such extreme & radical shade casting.
- dang 5y ago
  Please make your substantive points without crossing into name-calling or personal attack. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
rektide 5y ago
Twitter is minimally regulated, is obviously & clearly an open place for conversation, in a way no other big social network is. Further, Twitter's own research shows they have more broadly amplified the right than the left. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28953427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28953427 I for one could not be less shocked. There is no great vast system working against a view. It's just not so. Governing a platform is hard, keeping things on the rails is hard. Not every decision is easy & clean & obvious. Saying- this is not a democratic platform, this doesn't allow open conversation, is working against me- seems patently clearly obviously heinously untrue. 99.999999999999% of conversations go unmediated, unhindered. To try to grind an axe over this is, to portray Twitter as some horrible biased agent twisting things to it's desired world view, is to me, is to threaten obvious social order that exists, is to call fire where there is none. It creates a sense of agency & power & competency & deliberateness which in no way reflects anything resembling reality.

dTal 5y ago

The FAANG thing was just a reference to the fact that Facebook's userbase is vastly larger than Twitter's - and that's before we even get into WhatsApp and Instagram. Facebook is the social network and nothing else comes close. Twitter's a sideshow. A business is wayyyy more likely to have an official Facebook page than an official Twitter account. Regarding "politics", I think publicly displaying some principles is preferable to the faux-neutrality with secret behind-the-scenes tinkering that Facebook does. It gives me the willies.

rektide 5y ago

This is a weird out there view that, to me, sounds like it's coming from someone who wants to feel injured. Twitter's own research shows they have more broadly amplified the right than the left. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28953427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28953427 I for one could not be less shocked. You (and temp8964) are engaged in, in my view, conspiratorial minded thinking. You imagine some great vast system working against a view. It's just not so. Governing a platform is hard, keeping things on the rails is hard. Not every decision is easy & clean & obvious. Taking the conspiratorial minded view, saying- this is not a democratic platform, this doesn't allow open conversation, is working against me- seems patently clearly obviously heinously untrue. To try to grind an axe over this is, to me, bogus. There's no evidence, no claim I can possibly imagine that justifies such extreme & radical shade casting.

dang 5y ago
Please make your substantive points without crossing into name-calling or personal attack. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

rektide 5y ago

Twitter is minimally regulated, is obviously & clearly an open place for conversation, in a way no other big social network is. Further, Twitter's own research shows they have more broadly amplified the right than the left. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28953427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28953427 I for one could not be less shocked. There is no great vast system working against a view. It's just not so. Governing a platform is hard, keeping things on the rails is hard. Not every decision is easy & clean & obvious. Saying- this is not a democratic platform, this doesn't allow open conversation, is working against me- seems patently clearly obviously heinously untrue. 99.999999999999% of conversations go unmediated, unhindered. To try to grind an axe over this is, to portray Twitter as some horrible biased agent twisting things to it's desired world view, is to me, is to threaten obvious social order that exists, is to call fire where there is none. It creates a sense of agency & power & competency & deliberateness which in no way reflects anything resembling reality.