3 ms·
The irony of that statement is that we're talking about a private company deciding what is or isn't appropriate on its platform, not de jure censorship. It is n
by acjohnson55 4y ago
The irony of that statement is that we're talking about a private company deciding what is or isn't appropriate on its platform, not de jure censorship. It is not Twitter's responsibility to facilitate the Republicans' attempted October Surprise.
On the other hand, where Republicans have political power, they are using it restrict speech and rights, by law.
"Both sides" are not the same.
- nonethewiser 4y agoThis grants that Twitter is partisan though.
- nickthegreek 4y agoTwitter also removed posts at the behest of Trump’s team. But I will say they definitely lean left, which everyone knew.
- acjohnson55 4y agoNo, because "partisan" would imply they work on behalf of a political party. The so-called Twitter Files themselves demonstrate that this is not true. I'm not here to claim that people working at Twitter are unbiased. Everyone has bias. But also, there's extrinsic bias in what they're dealing with, in the sense that "both sides" aren't doing the same things. One trick is to behave egregiously and then when called out for it, claim bias.
- ehsankia 4y agoIt's also ridiculous to me that they think removing a couple naked pictures of Hunter is "censorship". As if you can truly "censor" information on the internet. You can maybe slow its spread, but if anything, the hardest thing is get things off the internet, not on. These people keep blaming some vague magical power for the reason Hunter stories never went anywhere, but the real reason no one talks about them isn't censorship, it's because they're literally non-stories. It's just revenge porn videos of a known drug abuser. To call this "authoritarian censorship" is honestly mind boggling.