16 ms·

I'd love to see some clear examples of conservative voices being targeted solely based on ideology, cause I don't think they exist. The replies so far seem to

I'd love to see some clear examples of conservative voices being targeted solely based on ideology, cause I don't think they exist. The replies so far seem to just confirm my point. Doesn't seem like any of them were banned "solely based on ideology" at all. Come on y'all, show me one example where someone was banned for asking for lower taxes!

systemvoltage 4y ago
LibsofTiktok was banned so many times.
- headhasthoughts 4y ago
  Libel isn't legal in the US. > In since-deleted tweets, the account specifically accused Chasten Buttigieg and The Trevor Project organization of grooming.[40][32][94] And outright misinformation isn't really an "ideological difference." > The account has been criticized for spreading hoaxes, including the litter boxes in schools hoax about bathrooms accommodations for students that identified as cats, and a false claim that students in a second-grade class in Austin, Texas were being taught about furries.[12][95][94] Outright lies are destructive to "public square"-style communication, and Twitter definitely can't be seen, legally, facilitating libel.
  - PathOfEclipse 4y ago
    > > In since-deleted tweets, the account specifically accused Chasten Buttigieg and The Trevor Project organization of grooming.[40][32][94] Leftists accuse conservatives of far worse things than that without ever getting censored. Leftists can event threaten other peoples' lives without getting censored: https://www.dailywire.com/news/7-twitter-accounts-that-have-promoted-violence-but-havent-been-banned https://www.dailywire.com/news/7-twitter-accounts-that-have-... Is it worse to be called a groomer or a Nazi? I guess, if you're twitter, it's worse to call a leftist a groomer than it is to call a conservative a Nazi. @NYCAntifa clearly gets away with the latter! > The account has been criticized for spreading hoaxes, including the litter boxes in schools hoax about bathrooms accommodations for students that identified as cats, and a false claim that students in a second-grade class in Austin, Texas were being taught about furries.[12][95][94] Libs of tik tok spread the misinformation, but they didn't create it. They cited someone else. If you don't think it's ok to cite someone else, later find out they lied, and then retract your statement, well, you probably have two standards, one for yourself and one for people you disagree with. > Outright lies are destructive to "public square"-style communication, and Twitter definitely can't be seen, legally, facilitating libel. It's amazing how many lies come from the left and never see any twitter censorship: https://www.dailywire.com/news/numerous-leftists-on-twitter-shared-the-obviously-sketchy-story-about-oklahoma-hospitals-being-overrun-with-ivermectin-overdoses https://www.dailywire.com/news/numerous-leftists-on-twitter-...
    - slg 4y ago
      >Is it worse to be called a groomer or a Nazi? I guess, if you're twitter, it's worse to call a leftist a groomer than it is to call a conservative a Nazi. "Groomer" is a noun that describes someone's actions. "Nazi" is a noun that describes someone's political beliefs. It is absolutely worse to be called a "groomer" because that is a direct claim of immoral and often illegal behavior. "You are doing something bad" is a more serious accusation than "you believe something bad".
      - PathOfEclipse 4y ago
        If your belief system allows you to support genocide, does that make you better than someone who is doing something bad now that doesn't support genocide? No, I don't think your moral compass is any less subjective than mine, here. People act on and are motivated by their beliefs, and, if you're a Nazi, you're going to do things that move the world in a particular direction. And, here is an article talking about how the Trevor project "does" groom people: https://personandidentity.com/mother-of-trans-child-poses-as-teen-to-find-out-how-trevor-project-grooms-kids-into-transitioning/ https://personandidentity.com/mother-of-trans-child-poses-as... And another on the same story: https://pitt.substack.com/p/the-trevor-project-undercover-mom https://pitt.substack.com/p/the-trevor-project-undercover-mo... Are those going to get censored if I post them on twitter?
        slg 4y ago
        >If your belief system allows you to support genocide, does that make you better than someone who is doing something bad now that doesn't support genocide? Many people who use the term "groomers" as loosely as LibsOfTikTok already think of this "grooming" as equivalent to a genocide. That is my point. "Groomers" implies that the bad is already happening while "Nazi" implies the bad is a belief with undefined actions. It is the difference between being call a murderer and a psychopath. One says you already did something bad. The other says you might be capable of something bad.
        jl6 4y ago
  - systemvoltage 4y ago
    This is not an accurate representation of what LibsofTiktok is and what content they post. There are specifics about what false claims. All they do is repost TikTok’s insanity. In some ways, LibsofTiktok has done world a whole lot of good, by exposing and immunizing against extreme left ideologies that even the most devout progressives reject. We need more of this that exposed extremes of either ideology. Because clearly the media has totally failed to do this.
  - redeeman 4y ago
    libsoftiktok literally just puts an eye on content other people choose to make public to begin with
    - smcl 4y ago
      That’s laughably false - take a peek at some of their tweets, shedloads of transphobic hate sprinkled with a bit of targeted harassment: https://github.com/salcoast/deleted-tweets-archive/blob/main/datasets/libsoftiktok-deleted.md https://github.com/salcoast/deleted-tweets-archive/blob/main...
      - redeeman 4y ago
        Well okay, a paraphrase-transcription aswell. I do agree that the content that particular user finds and shows to me is very disturbing, especially given that it is often teachers taking care of very impressionable people(children) in a position of authority.
        smcl 4y ago
        Are we looking at the same page? The majority of these are just a person frothing mad about a grand conspiracy of teachers who will stop at nothing until they have "trans"-ed all kids. They're completely unhinged
        redeeman 4y ago
        is that why the teachers are crying due to the actual parents getting a glimpse into the school?
        smcl 4y ago
        I can't make head nor tail of what you're saying. Can you try again, please?
  - scythe 4y ago
    >Libel isn't legal in the US. In order for something to be libel, you have to know it is false and intend for people to believe it is true. The litter box story for example was spread by a trolling organization with the intention of fooling people like LoTT and Tucker. It's not libel because they fell for it — it's stupid, but it's not libel. Likewise, the criticism of the The Trevor Project likely reflects a sincerely held belief that the known activities of TTP constitute "grooming", and not a measurable claim that TTP staff are actively engaging in activities conventionally understood as pedophilia. Also not libel.
    - joshuamorton 4y ago
      This is not true. Defamation (libel and slander) in the US is distinct depending on how well known the victim is. For a famous victim, yes you must essentially know the statement was false. But if the victim is not a public individual, you need only act with negligence (e.g. violate the reasonable person standard). The litter box story, for example, doesn't involve famous people, it's like random local school districts, and no reasonable person would believe it to be true. The Trevor project likely does constitute a public organization, so the standard is higher, but only requires actual malice, which means "reckless disregard" for the truth of the statements. It's probably not met, because it is a high standard, but it doesn't actually require that they know themselves to be lying.
o_1 4y ago
The entire interview with JRE Vijaya Gadde can be referenced. Like Tim Pool or not he clearly shows the bias, Jack is mostly silent on those instances.
ipaddr 4y ago
The latest Kanye West purely ideologist posts could be on. Silencing those who oppose: co-ed bathrooms, gender reassignment for tweens and teens or gay marriage. Can we jump to the covid blacklists yet
- mynameisvlad 4y ago
  Kanye West was not targeted "solely based on ideology." > In one post on Twitter, Ye said he would soon go “death con 3 on JEWISH PEOPLE,” according to internet archive records, making an apparent reference to the U.S. defense readiness condition scale known as DEFCON. https://apnews.com/article/twitter-inc-entertainment-music-ba5c710ec59d195fe4d83cb2c9343589 https://apnews.com/article/twitter-inc-entertainment-music-b... That entirely reads as a threat against Jewish people.
  - Ancapistani 4y ago
    > That entirely reads as a threat against Jewish people. When I saw that, my assumption was that it was a malapropism.
    - mynameisvlad 4y ago
      Reading it either with the word death as written or DEF as intended, it's still a threat.
  - ipaddr 4y ago
kyleblarson 4y ago
There was this guy with strange hair and an orangeish complexion who had a lot of followers who was banned.
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  For breaking the rules regarding inciting violence, not his ideology.
  - kyleblarson 4y ago
    Yet the ayatollah still has an account. Strange.
  - rufus_foreman 4y ago
    The two tweets for which he was banned were: "The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!" and "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th."
- heurist 4y ago
  Why was he banned? Someone at Twitter that day felt a duty to prevent the person who led his violent supporters to the capitol from continuing to speak through their platform. Are you saying this was a purely political decision?
  - jpadkins 4y ago
    If their intention was to reduce violence from his supporters, then why did they delete the video he uploaded at 4:16 that stated “I know your pain. I know you’re hurt. We had an election that was stolen from us,” he said. “It was a landslide election, and everyone knows it, especially the other side. But you have to go home now. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt.” The president called it a “very tough period of time,” calling the election “fraudulent.” “But we can’t play into the hands of these people,” Trump said. “We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You’re very special. You’ve seen what happens, you see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel. But go home and go home in peace.” > who led his violent supporters to the capitol The capitol was breached while Trump was still speaking to the larger crowd several blocks away. if twitter's goal was reduction of violence, then they would have amplified Trump's video calling for peaceful dispersion, not delete it.
petilon 4y ago
The problem is that a lot of miscreants hide behind the label "conservative voice". Like people who spread hate, misinformation and conspiracy theories online. We need to differentiate between these fake "conservative voices" and real conservatives. Pretty sure people in the second category are not being targeted.
- uoaei 4y ago
  No true conservative, eh? I implore you (all) to consider this angle when complaining about "left" boogeymen. Do the fixie-riding anarchists represent the left? Do the alt-right racist and misanthropic school shooters represent the right? What of each side encourages these extremities? Further, which ones do commit societal (psychological, economic, etc.) damage?
  - o_1 4y ago
    I think psychological damage can be blamed on all degrees of the spectrum, both sides.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  The label of "hate" very often does get slapped on real conservative voices. Supporting sex-segregated sports is considered hate speech by many, for instance. If your label of "hate" encompasses typical conservative view, then it's just a shallow attempt to deflect from the fact that conservative views are indeed being suppressed.
koolba 4y ago
The entire Hunter Biden laptop saga isn’t enough for you? Days before a national election they deliberately censored a story pertaining to corruption of one of the candidates, censored anyone that shared the story, and censored anyone that mentioned the censoring of the story.
- joshuamorton 4y ago
  What about the laptop suggested anything unethical done by Joe Biden? Ultimately that's the reason the story was "censored", it was fake. Something vaguely suspicious sounding about Hunter used to try and malign his dad, and ethical news sites and journalists wanted nothing to do with it. To this day, there's no evidence of any actual wrongdoing, and even Trump's own justice department failed to charge Hunter, or even continue the investigation, because it was so clearly nothing of note.
zo1 4y ago
Jordan Peterson. But you'll find a reason for this example and any other to not to fit your criteria. Another: Stefan Molyneux.
PathOfEclipse 4y ago
I'm not sure why GP was downvoted. There are many, many examples. You would probably see them if your primary news sources weren't the NYT, the Washington Post, CNN, or MSNBC. Twitter is the poster child for authoritarian leftist social media! The easiest way to get censored for ideological beliefs was to state that biological sex is a reality: https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-tucker-carlson-for-saying-a-biological-man-is-a-man https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-tucker-carlso... Babylon Bee got banned for harmless satire: https://www.dailywire.com/news/babylon-bee-a-factor-in-musk-buying-twitter-issues-tweet-satirizing-twitter-employee-undergoing-therapy-twitter-labels-tweet-with-warning https://www.dailywire.com/news/babylon-bee-a-factor-in-musk-... Libs of tiktok was banned for "hate speech." I'm not sure they ever even let the account owner know exactly what was said that deserved censorship: https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-popular-account-that-exposes-radical-gender-theories-for-hateful-conduct https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-popular-accou... A classic is when the NY Post got locked out for posting factual information that the left wanted to bury before the 2020 election: https://www.dailywire.com/news/nypost-remains-locked-out-of-twitter-a-week-after-publishing-bombshell-hunter-biden-report https://www.dailywire.com/news/nypost-remains-locked-out-of-... Twitter censored health experts whenever what they said didn't fit the COVID narrative put forth by the CDC: https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-white-house-health-expert-for-questioning-widespread-mask-wearing https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-white-house-h... There is still, today, multiple years after the start of the pandemic, no strong evidence that masks did anything significant to slow the spread of COVID. I can provide many citations if you need them. In fact, much of what big tech censored turned out to be true or still plausible today, like: the lab leak theory, natural immunity being more effective than the vaccine (even Bill Gates admits this now!), and so on. James Lindsay got locked out for saying "OK groomer". https://www.dailywire.com/news/author-james-lindsay-banned-from-twitter-trans-harvard-law-instructor-claims-credit https://www.dailywire.com/news/author-james-lindsay-banned-f... Leftists have said many, many more vile and hateful things than that without suffering a single consequence, including making threats on others' lives: https://www.foxnews.com/media/libs-of-tik-tok-creator-twitters-double-standards-threaten-violence-still-keep-account https://www.foxnews.com/media/libs-of-tik-tok-creator-twitte...
- mullingitover 4y ago
chroma 4y ago
The Babylon Bee has been suspended for this tweet.[1] Meghan Murphy was permanently banned for a tweet that simply said, "Men aren't women."[2] The majority of Americans agree with these banned views. In the latest Pew polls, 60% of US adults say that gender is determined by one's sex at birth and cannot be changed.[3] Whether that view is right or not, it's pretty silly to issue bans for saying something that most people believe. I've seen accounts get banned for replacing "white" with "black" in popular hateful tweets. Apparently only one kind of racism is allowed on Twitter.[4] If you read Twitter's reasoning for suspending Trump, you'll see it's based on two tweets, neither of which calls for violence.[5] Twitter had to use the excuse that some people might be emboldened to commit violence by his tweets. That's true for almost any politician. But the president of South Africa's Black First Land First party can threaten to kill white people and only get a seven day suspension.[6] Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, still has a Twitter account[7] despite endorsing the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. Rushdie is now blind in one eye and has lost the use of an arm after an assassination attempt in August. The double standard could not be more obvious. 1. https://twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1504155537008697352 https://twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1504155537008697352 2. https://web.archive.org/web/20190407204840/https://lawandcrime.com/lawsuit/feminist-writer-sues-twitter-after-she-tweets-men-arent-woman-and-gets-banned/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190407204840/https://lawandcri... 3. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/psdt_06-28-22_gender_identity_0_3/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/america... 4. https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55863 https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55863 5. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio... 6. https://web.archive.org/web/20181216163405/https://citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/social-media/2048273/twitter-suspends-mngxitamas-account-after-kill-whites-threats-iec-assessing-what-to-do/ https://web.archive.org/web/20181216163405/https://citizen.c... 7. https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir
- implements 4y ago
  > In the latest Pew polls, 60% of US adults say that gender is determined by one's sex at birth and cannot be changed … What is “gender” in the above sentence? It’s a 1950s attitude that males are born masculine and females feminine - that was largely rejected from the 70s onward, people being held to be unique individuals and gender stereotyping deemed sexist and oppressively limiting. I was under the impression that young people think gender identity is determined biologically independently of reproductive sex - hence (to them) “Trans women are women” because of their innate gender identity. Which (if either) is right? - The issue appears to me to be very philosophically confused.
naasking 4y ago
> I'd love to see some clear examples of conservative voices being targeted solely based on ideology, cause I don't think they exist. Certain biases are baked into Twitter's content moderation policies. For instance, on COVID and gender. It just so happens that conservatives statistically disagree with the positions taken by those policies significantly more than liberals. Is that an anti-conservative bias? Well, liberals often make the argument that the drug war was prejudicial against black people because the laws specifically targeted drugs that were more common in black communities. If you accept this argument, by parity of reasoning, you should also accept that Twitter's rules are prejudicial against conservative views. For examples of prominent cancellations, there was Alex Berenson, Megan Murphy, Jordan Peterson, among others. These people aren't all strictly conservatives, but they were banned for views that conservatives mostly agree with.
- Rainydae 4y ago
  You have any data sources to back your claims? Or are these your opninions?
  - naasking 4y ago
    What claims do you want data for? That conservatives had opinions COVID that often ran contrary to mainstream narratives? Or that conservatives have views favouring traditional gender roles and their identification with biological sex? Or that both of these sets of conservative views run afoul of Twitter's policies?
    - Rainydae 4y ago
      Any quantifiable data/research that concludes/outlines specific biases baked into Twitters algorithm. Peer reviewed?
      - naasking 4y ago
        I didn't even mention Twitter's algorithm so I have no idea what that has to do with anything.
jpadkins 4y ago
suppression of the hunter biden story was the clearest one. (let me know if you need details or citations on the NY Post article & account being banned by twitter before the election). Also Alex Berenson's lawsuit with Twitter revealed that public officials leaned on twitter to suppress his voice. I think these emails are revealing on the 'coziness' between the current administration and twitter policy team. https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-white-house-privately-demanded?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2 https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-white-house-privatel... Can you imagine if the Trump administration put pressure on twitter to suppress reporters they thought was 'epicenter of disinfo'?

systemvoltage 4y ago

LibsofTiktok was banned so many times.

headhasthoughts 4y ago
Libel isn't legal in the US. > In since-deleted tweets, the account specifically accused Chasten Buttigieg and The Trevor Project organization of grooming.[40][32][94] And outright misinformation isn't really an "ideological difference." > The account has been criticized for spreading hoaxes, including the litter boxes in schools hoax about bathrooms accommodations for students that identified as cats, and a false claim that students in a second-grade class in Austin, Texas were being taught about furries.[12][95][94] Outright lies are destructive to "public square"-style communication, and Twitter definitely can't be seen, legally, facilitating libel.
- PathOfEclipse 4y ago
  > > In since-deleted tweets, the account specifically accused Chasten Buttigieg and The Trevor Project organization of grooming.[40][32][94] Leftists accuse conservatives of far worse things than that without ever getting censored. Leftists can event threaten other peoples' lives without getting censored: https://www.dailywire.com/news/7-twitter-accounts-that-have-promoted-violence-but-havent-been-banned https://www.dailywire.com/news/7-twitter-accounts-that-have-... Is it worse to be called a groomer or a Nazi? I guess, if you're twitter, it's worse to call a leftist a groomer than it is to call a conservative a Nazi. @NYCAntifa clearly gets away with the latter! > The account has been criticized for spreading hoaxes, including the litter boxes in schools hoax about bathrooms accommodations for students that identified as cats, and a false claim that students in a second-grade class in Austin, Texas were being taught about furries.[12][95][94] Libs of tik tok spread the misinformation, but they didn't create it. They cited someone else. If you don't think it's ok to cite someone else, later find out they lied, and then retract your statement, well, you probably have two standards, one for yourself and one for people you disagree with. > Outright lies are destructive to "public square"-style communication, and Twitter definitely can't be seen, legally, facilitating libel. It's amazing how many lies come from the left and never see any twitter censorship: https://www.dailywire.com/news/numerous-leftists-on-twitter-shared-the-obviously-sketchy-story-about-oklahoma-hospitals-being-overrun-with-ivermectin-overdoses https://www.dailywire.com/news/numerous-leftists-on-twitter-...
  - slg 4y ago
    >Is it worse to be called a groomer or a Nazi? I guess, if you're twitter, it's worse to call a leftist a groomer than it is to call a conservative a Nazi. "Groomer" is a noun that describes someone's actions. "Nazi" is a noun that describes someone's political beliefs. It is absolutely worse to be called a "groomer" because that is a direct claim of immoral and often illegal behavior. "You are doing something bad" is a more serious accusation than "you believe something bad".
    - PathOfEclipse 4y ago
      If your belief system allows you to support genocide, does that make you better than someone who is doing something bad now that doesn't support genocide? No, I don't think your moral compass is any less subjective than mine, here. People act on and are motivated by their beliefs, and, if you're a Nazi, you're going to do things that move the world in a particular direction. And, here is an article talking about how the Trevor project "does" groom people: https://personandidentity.com/mother-of-trans-child-poses-as-teen-to-find-out-how-trevor-project-grooms-kids-into-transitioning/ https://personandidentity.com/mother-of-trans-child-poses-as... And another on the same story: https://pitt.substack.com/p/the-trevor-project-undercover-mom https://pitt.substack.com/p/the-trevor-project-undercover-mo... Are those going to get censored if I post them on twitter?
      - slg 4y ago
        >If your belief system allows you to support genocide, does that make you better than someone who is doing something bad now that doesn't support genocide? Many people who use the term "groomers" as loosely as LibsOfTikTok already think of this "grooming" as equivalent to a genocide. That is my point. "Groomers" implies that the bad is already happening while "Nazi" implies the bad is a belief with undefined actions. It is the difference between being call a murderer and a psychopath. One says you already did something bad. The other says you might be capable of something bad.
        jl6 4y ago
- systemvoltage 4y ago
  This is not an accurate representation of what LibsofTiktok is and what content they post. There are specifics about what false claims. All they do is repost TikTok’s insanity. In some ways, LibsofTiktok has done world a whole lot of good, by exposing and immunizing against extreme left ideologies that even the most devout progressives reject. We need more of this that exposed extremes of either ideology. Because clearly the media has totally failed to do this.
- redeeman 4y ago
  libsoftiktok literally just puts an eye on content other people choose to make public to begin with
  - smcl 4y ago
    That’s laughably false - take a peek at some of their tweets, shedloads of transphobic hate sprinkled with a bit of targeted harassment: https://github.com/salcoast/deleted-tweets-archive/blob/main/datasets/libsoftiktok-deleted.md https://github.com/salcoast/deleted-tweets-archive/blob/main...
    - redeeman 4y ago
      Well okay, a paraphrase-transcription aswell. I do agree that the content that particular user finds and shows to me is very disturbing, especially given that it is often teachers taking care of very impressionable people(children) in a position of authority.
      - smcl 4y ago
        Are we looking at the same page? The majority of these are just a person frothing mad about a grand conspiracy of teachers who will stop at nothing until they have "trans"-ed all kids. They're completely unhinged
        redeeman 4y ago
        is that why the teachers are crying due to the actual parents getting a glimpse into the school?
        smcl 4y ago
        I can't make head nor tail of what you're saying. Can you try again, please?
- scythe 4y ago
  >Libel isn't legal in the US. In order for something to be libel, you have to know it is false and intend for people to believe it is true. The litter box story for example was spread by a trolling organization with the intention of fooling people like LoTT and Tucker. It's not libel because they fell for it — it's stupid, but it's not libel. Likewise, the criticism of the The Trevor Project likely reflects a sincerely held belief that the known activities of TTP constitute "grooming", and not a measurable claim that TTP staff are actively engaging in activities conventionally understood as pedophilia. Also not libel.
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    This is not true. Defamation (libel and slander) in the US is distinct depending on how well known the victim is. For a famous victim, yes you must essentially know the statement was false. But if the victim is not a public individual, you need only act with negligence (e.g. violate the reasonable person standard). The litter box story, for example, doesn't involve famous people, it's like random local school districts, and no reasonable person would believe it to be true. The Trevor project likely does constitute a public organization, so the standard is higher, but only requires actual malice, which means "reckless disregard" for the truth of the statements. It's probably not met, because it is a high standard, but it doesn't actually require that they know themselves to be lying.

o_1 4y ago

The entire interview with JRE Vijaya Gadde can be referenced. Like Tim Pool or not he clearly shows the bias, Jack is mostly silent on those instances.

ipaddr 4y ago

The latest Kanye West purely ideologist posts could be on. Silencing those who oppose: co-ed bathrooms, gender reassignment for tweens and teens or gay marriage. Can we jump to the covid blacklists yet

mynameisvlad 4y ago
Kanye West was not targeted "solely based on ideology." > In one post on Twitter, Ye said he would soon go “death con 3 on JEWISH PEOPLE,” according to internet archive records, making an apparent reference to the U.S. defense readiness condition scale known as DEFCON. https://apnews.com/article/twitter-inc-entertainment-music-ba5c710ec59d195fe4d83cb2c9343589 https://apnews.com/article/twitter-inc-entertainment-music-b... That entirely reads as a threat against Jewish people.
- Ancapistani 4y ago
  > That entirely reads as a threat against Jewish people. When I saw that, my assumption was that it was a malapropism.
  - mynameisvlad 4y ago
    Reading it either with the word death as written or DEF as intended, it's still a threat.
- ipaddr 4y ago

kyleblarson 4y ago

There was this guy with strange hair and an orangeish complexion who had a lot of followers who was banned.

colinmhayes 4y ago
For breaking the rules regarding inciting violence, not his ideology.
- kyleblarson 4y ago
  Yet the ayatollah still has an account. Strange.
- rufus_foreman 4y ago
  The two tweets for which he was banned were: "The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!" and "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th."
heurist 4y ago
Why was he banned? Someone at Twitter that day felt a duty to prevent the person who led his violent supporters to the capitol from continuing to speak through their platform. Are you saying this was a purely political decision?
- jpadkins 4y ago
  If their intention was to reduce violence from his supporters, then why did they delete the video he uploaded at 4:16 that stated “I know your pain. I know you’re hurt. We had an election that was stolen from us,” he said. “It was a landslide election, and everyone knows it, especially the other side. But you have to go home now. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt.” The president called it a “very tough period of time,” calling the election “fraudulent.” “But we can’t play into the hands of these people,” Trump said. “We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You’re very special. You’ve seen what happens, you see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel. But go home and go home in peace.” > who led his violent supporters to the capitol The capitol was breached while Trump was still speaking to the larger crowd several blocks away. if twitter's goal was reduction of violence, then they would have amplified Trump's video calling for peaceful dispersion, not delete it.

petilon 4y ago

The problem is that a lot of miscreants hide behind the label "conservative voice". Like people who spread hate, misinformation and conspiracy theories online. We need to differentiate between these fake "conservative voices" and real conservatives. Pretty sure people in the second category are not being targeted.

uoaei 4y ago
No true conservative, eh? I implore you (all) to consider this angle when complaining about "left" boogeymen. Do the fixie-riding anarchists represent the left? Do the alt-right racist and misanthropic school shooters represent the right? What of each side encourages these extremities? Further, which ones do commit societal (psychological, economic, etc.) damage?
- o_1 4y ago
  I think psychological damage can be blamed on all degrees of the spectrum, both sides.
Manuel_D 4y ago
The label of "hate" very often does get slapped on real conservative voices. Supporting sex-segregated sports is considered hate speech by many, for instance. If your label of "hate" encompasses typical conservative view, then it's just a shallow attempt to deflect from the fact that conservative views are indeed being suppressed.

koolba 4y ago

The entire Hunter Biden laptop saga isn’t enough for you? Days before a national election they deliberately censored a story pertaining to corruption of one of the candidates, censored anyone that shared the story, and censored anyone that mentioned the censoring of the story.

joshuamorton 4y ago
What about the laptop suggested anything unethical done by Joe Biden? Ultimately that's the reason the story was "censored", it was fake. Something vaguely suspicious sounding about Hunter used to try and malign his dad, and ethical news sites and journalists wanted nothing to do with it. To this day, there's no evidence of any actual wrongdoing, and even Trump's own justice department failed to charge Hunter, or even continue the investigation, because it was so clearly nothing of note.

zo1 4y ago

Jordan Peterson. But you'll find a reason for this example and any other to not to fit your criteria. Another: Stefan Molyneux.

PathOfEclipse 4y ago

I'm not sure why GP was downvoted. There are many, many examples. You would probably see them if your primary news sources weren't the NYT, the Washington Post, CNN, or MSNBC. Twitter is the poster child for authoritarian leftist social media! The easiest way to get censored for ideological beliefs was to state that biological sex is a reality: https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-tucker-carlson-for-saying-a-biological-man-is-a-man https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-tucker-carlso... Babylon Bee got banned for harmless satire: https://www.dailywire.com/news/babylon-bee-a-factor-in-musk-buying-twitter-issues-tweet-satirizing-twitter-employee-undergoing-therapy-twitter-labels-tweet-with-warning https://www.dailywire.com/news/babylon-bee-a-factor-in-musk-... Libs of tiktok was banned for "hate speech." I'm not sure they ever even let the account owner know exactly what was said that deserved censorship: https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-popular-account-that-exposes-radical-gender-theories-for-hateful-conduct https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-popular-accou... A classic is when the NY Post got locked out for posting factual information that the left wanted to bury before the 2020 election: https://www.dailywire.com/news/nypost-remains-locked-out-of-twitter-a-week-after-publishing-bombshell-hunter-biden-report https://www.dailywire.com/news/nypost-remains-locked-out-of-... Twitter censored health experts whenever what they said didn't fit the COVID narrative put forth by the CDC: https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-white-house-health-expert-for-questioning-widespread-mask-wearing https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitter-censors-white-house-h... There is still, today, multiple years after the start of the pandemic, no strong evidence that masks did anything significant to slow the spread of COVID. I can provide many citations if you need them. In fact, much of what big tech censored turned out to be true or still plausible today, like: the lab leak theory, natural immunity being more effective than the vaccine (even Bill Gates admits this now!), and so on. James Lindsay got locked out for saying "OK groomer". https://www.dailywire.com/news/author-james-lindsay-banned-from-twitter-trans-harvard-law-instructor-claims-credit https://www.dailywire.com/news/author-james-lindsay-banned-f... Leftists have said many, many more vile and hateful things than that without suffering a single consequence, including making threats on others' lives: https://www.foxnews.com/media/libs-of-tik-tok-creator-twitters-double-standards-threaten-violence-still-keep-account https://www.foxnews.com/media/libs-of-tik-tok-creator-twitte...

mullingitover 4y ago

chroma 4y ago

The Babylon Bee has been suspended for this tweet.[1] Meghan Murphy was permanently banned for a tweet that simply said, "Men aren't women."[2] The majority of Americans agree with these banned views. In the latest Pew polls, 60% of US adults say that gender is determined by one's sex at birth and cannot be changed.[3] Whether that view is right or not, it's pretty silly to issue bans for saying something that most people believe. I've seen accounts get banned for replacing "white" with "black" in popular hateful tweets. Apparently only one kind of racism is allowed on Twitter.[4] If you read Twitter's reasoning for suspending Trump, you'll see it's based on two tweets, neither of which calls for violence.[5] Twitter had to use the excuse that some people might be emboldened to commit violence by his tweets. That's true for almost any politician. But the president of South Africa's Black First Land First party can threaten to kill white people and only get a seven day suspension.[6] Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, still has a Twitter account[7] despite endorsing the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. Rushdie is now blind in one eye and has lost the use of an arm after an assassination attempt in August. The double standard could not be more obvious. 1. https://twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1504155537008697352 https://twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1504155537008697352 2. https://web.archive.org/web/20190407204840/https://lawandcrime.com/lawsuit/feminist-writer-sues-twitter-after-she-tweets-men-arent-woman-and-gets-banned/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190407204840/https://lawandcri... 3. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/psdt_06-28-22_gender_identity_0_3/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/america... 4. https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55863 https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55863 5. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio... 6. https://web.archive.org/web/20181216163405/https://citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/social-media/2048273/twitter-suspends-mngxitamas-account-after-kill-whites-threats-iec-assessing-what-to-do/ https://web.archive.org/web/20181216163405/https://citizen.c... 7. https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir

implements 4y ago
> In the latest Pew polls, 60% of US adults say that gender is determined by one's sex at birth and cannot be changed … What is “gender” in the above sentence? It’s a 1950s attitude that males are born masculine and females feminine - that was largely rejected from the 70s onward, people being held to be unique individuals and gender stereotyping deemed sexist and oppressively limiting. I was under the impression that young people think gender identity is determined biologically independently of reproductive sex - hence (to them) “Trans women are women” because of their innate gender identity. Which (if either) is right? - The issue appears to me to be very philosophically confused.

naasking 4y ago

> I'd love to see some clear examples of conservative voices being targeted solely based on ideology, cause I don't think they exist. Certain biases are baked into Twitter's content moderation policies. For instance, on COVID and gender. It just so happens that conservatives statistically disagree with the positions taken by those policies significantly more than liberals. Is that an anti-conservative bias? Well, liberals often make the argument that the drug war was prejudicial against black people because the laws specifically targeted drugs that were more common in black communities. If you accept this argument, by parity of reasoning, you should also accept that Twitter's rules are prejudicial against conservative views. For examples of prominent cancellations, there was Alex Berenson, Megan Murphy, Jordan Peterson, among others. These people aren't all strictly conservatives, but they were banned for views that conservatives mostly agree with.

Rainydae 4y ago
You have any data sources to back your claims? Or are these your opninions?
- naasking 4y ago
  What claims do you want data for? That conservatives had opinions COVID that often ran contrary to mainstream narratives? Or that conservatives have views favouring traditional gender roles and their identification with biological sex? Or that both of these sets of conservative views run afoul of Twitter's policies?
  - Rainydae 4y ago
    Any quantifiable data/research that concludes/outlines specific biases baked into Twitters algorithm. Peer reviewed?
    - naasking 4y ago
      I didn't even mention Twitter's algorithm so I have no idea what that has to do with anything.

jpadkins 4y ago

suppression of the hunter biden story was the clearest one. (let me know if you need details or citations on the NY Post article & account being banned by twitter before the election). Also Alex Berenson's lawsuit with Twitter revealed that public officials leaned on twitter to suppress his voice. I think these emails are revealing on the 'coziness' between the current administration and twitter policy team. https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-white-house-privately-demanded?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2 https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-white-house-privatel... Can you imagine if the Trump administration put pressure on twitter to suppress reporters they thought was 'epicenter of disinfo'?