3 ms·
> It is 'unfair' of journalists to ignore the obvious story and instead write drivel. And what is this obvious story that is being ignored? The one I'm seeing
by Kbelicius 4y ago
> It is 'unfair' of journalists to ignore the obvious story and instead write drivel.
And what is this obvious story that is being ignored? The one I'm seeing here is that Truth Social is in violation of Play Stores TOS. Google even told TS how to address those problems. Interestingly, after that, TS claimed that the ball is in googles court. Seams that the drivel is coming from TS.
> There is no question that this was politically motivated.
Of course there is a question if this was politically motivated or not. After all, apple has allowed it on their store and there are other similar apps on play store. Don't see why not being allowed on a platform for not complying with TOS should automatically be considered politically motivated.
> Google couldn't give a shit about content moderation on any other app.
Do you have any sources or example of this?
- upsidesinclude 4y agoIt's about selective use of TOS. That is a veneer under which the reality is obscured. They choose to enforce on dubious grounds. The play store is the source, it is commonly known that apps on the play store violate TOS. I'm not going to drown in this stream, attempting to provide an endless socratic dialog with background information. Provide your own contrary evidence that the play store is stringent in adherence to TOS across its app selection. That malware and tracking apps are denied