5 ms·

I agree a single company doesn't have all the power, but for some reason they generally seem to act in concert with one another. Take for example the Hunter Bid

by ccn0p 4y ago

I agree a single company doesn't have all the power, but for some reason they generally seem to act in concert with one another. Take for example the Hunter Biden laptop story. It was suppressed "by mistake" according to Jack himself [1]. Later, survey indicated many voters believed it was a "very important" story [2]. Another example is lab leak. Thus, yes, yes they do. [1] https://nypost.com/2021/03/25/dorsey-says-blocking-posts-hunter-biden-story-was-total-mistake/ https://nypost.com/2021/03/25/dorsey-says-blocking-posts-hun... [2] https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/march_2022/hunter_s_laptop_from_hell_is_an_important_story_voters_sayhttps://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/march_2022/hunter_s_laptop_from_hell_is_an_important_story_voters_say https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/gen...

themitigating 4y ago
Do you have any evidence the laptop story suppression wasn't a mistake?
- overrun11 4y ago
  Do you have evidence that it wasn't? Why do you get to decide the null hypothesis?
  - themitigating 4y ago
    Twitter claimed it was a mistake, that's all the information we have. You're claiming they are lying, you have to offer evidence to prove that claim.
    - overrun11 4y ago
      You've ignored the point. Twitter made the claim that they made a mistake, should they be held to your standard that "you have to offer evidence to prove that claim."
- the_doctah 4y ago
  I'm sorry, you think every social media company censoring a story at the same time was somehow a mistake??
boplicity 4y ago
Strangely, practically everyone knows about the Hunter Biden laptop story, so no, that was certainly not very suppressed -- and you certainly did see articles about it in established media organizations, just not all of them. So, no, it was not "essentially removed" from "public discussion" as the OP claimed. In fact, your bringing up the story (which I immediately recognized) proves the point. It is indeed, part of public discussion.
- overrun11 4y ago
  Yes now it is. It wasn't nearly as well known _before_ the election.
  - boplicity 4y ago
    There were articles about the story published by many mainstream news organizations before the election -- including the Washington Post, The New York Times, Politico, Vox, Techcrunch, CNN, CBS News, and USA Today, among others. I fail to see the "supression" of the story from the public discussion, based on the reality of the situation. Edit: The point is that the story was part of the "public discussion" -- though I understand that some people disagree with some of the articles that were part of the public discussion. Disagreement is a normal part of "discussion." The original claim I was responding to was that this story was "suppressed" from "public discussion." It was not.
    - WaxedChewbacca 4y ago
    - overrun11 4y ago
      You're making no distinction between the content of the coverage. The Hunter Biden laptop story was widely covered pre-election in the context of it being false or disinfo. Politico: "Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say" source: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-... NPR: "Analysis: Questionable 'N.Y. Post' Scoop Driven By Ex-Hannity Producer And Giuliani" source: https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/924506867/analysis-questionable-n-y-post-scoop-driven-by-ex-hannity-producer-giuliani https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/924506867/analysis-questionab... Compilation of journalists calling it disinfo: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1440402740409110528 https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1440402740409110528 I honestly don't think I am following your argument at all. The fact that they wrongly reported on something without evidence is exactly the point.

by ccn0p 4y ago

themitigating 4y ago

Do you have any evidence the laptop story suppression wasn't a mistake?

overrun11 4y ago
Do you have evidence that it wasn't? Why do you get to decide the null hypothesis?
- themitigating 4y ago
  Twitter claimed it was a mistake, that's all the information we have. You're claiming they are lying, you have to offer evidence to prove that claim.
  - overrun11 4y ago
    You've ignored the point. Twitter made the claim that they made a mistake, should they be held to your standard that "you have to offer evidence to prove that claim."
the_doctah 4y ago
I'm sorry, you think every social media company censoring a story at the same time was somehow a mistake??

boplicity 4y ago

Strangely, practically everyone knows about the Hunter Biden laptop story, so no, that was certainly not very suppressed -- and you certainly did see articles about it in established media organizations, just not all of them. So, no, it was not "essentially removed" from "public discussion" as the OP claimed. In fact, your bringing up the story (which I immediately recognized) proves the point. It is indeed, part of public discussion.

overrun11 4y ago
Yes now it is. It wasn't nearly as well known _before_ the election.
- boplicity 4y ago
  There were articles about the story published by many mainstream news organizations before the election -- including the Washington Post, The New York Times, Politico, Vox, Techcrunch, CNN, CBS News, and USA Today, among others. I fail to see the "supression" of the story from the public discussion, based on the reality of the situation. Edit: The point is that the story was part of the "public discussion" -- though I understand that some people disagree with some of the articles that were part of the public discussion. Disagreement is a normal part of "discussion." The original claim I was responding to was that this story was "suppressed" from "public discussion." It was not.
  - WaxedChewbacca 4y ago
  - overrun11 4y ago
    You're making no distinction between the content of the coverage. The Hunter Biden laptop story was widely covered pre-election in the context of it being false or disinfo. Politico: "Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say" source: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-... NPR: "Analysis: Questionable 'N.Y. Post' Scoop Driven By Ex-Hannity Producer And Giuliani" source: https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/924506867/analysis-questionable-n-y-post-scoop-driven-by-ex-hannity-producer-giuliani https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/924506867/analysis-questionab... Compilation of journalists calling it disinfo: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1440402740409110528 https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1440402740409110528 I honestly don't think I am following your argument at all. The fact that they wrongly reported on something without evidence is exactly the point.