4 ms·
If the FBI was legally compelling or coercing Twitter into banning users, that would be unconstitutional. That is not what has been demonstrated here.
by djur 4y ago
If the FBI was legally compelling or coercing Twitter into banning users, that would be unconstitutional. That is not what has been demonstrated here.
- colordrops 4y agoWhy is the FBI spending tax payer dollars trying to influence media outlets at all? Do you not find this alarming? It's absolutely outside their realm of responsibility.
- Apocryphon 4y agoThe Pentagon routinely screens Hollywood blockbusters to ensure the content does not offend the military, and makes suggestions to studio executives as to how to best portray the military. The government is constantly influencing media outlets, none of this is new.
- colordrops 4y agoLet me cut and paste my comment with a minor change: Why is the Pentagon spending tax payer dollars trying to influence media outlets at all? Do you not find this alarming? It's absolutely outside their realm of responsibility. What does being "new" have anything to do with whether it matters or not?
- Apocryphon 4y agoIt's not alarming because it's so pervasive it's the way things are. Thus when something new is brought up their impact needs to be weighed accordingly to prioritize.
- colordrops 4y agoGrowing up in a fascist regime may make it seem normal but at some point you need to raise your hackles and feel alarmed regardless of the past, because it's a fascist regime.
- Apocryphon 4y agoYes, and that's how I feel about the shutdown of the Z-Library, and their refusal to declassify their JFK files.
- colordrops 4y agoI don't disagree with you, and two things can be true at once.
- Apocryphon 4y agoThen we have consensus.
- djur 4y agoThe FBI accepts reports from the public about people interfering with elections, and they forward on those reports to the relevant platforms. I would like to see the FBI and other law enforcement agencies considerably reduced in scale and power, but as long as they exist I think monitoring threats to free and fair elections is one of the better things they can do with said taxpayer dollars.
- colordrops 4y agoNo government entity should be involved in the slightest in policing media in order to "protect" elections. It's very subjective and extremely ripe for abuse. The only reason election outcomes are so vulnerable to media manipulation is because the US political system is captured by cynical corporate interests that draw an arbitrary line unrelated to idealism across a set of issues to split voters almost perfectly at 50/50, then do everything in their power through corporate media to minimize third parties and use legal challenges to remove them from the ballot. If viable candidates that actually served the interest of the public rather than the ruling class were given fair access to the process, then we wouldn't be so vulnerable to manipulation. The FBI's role is to protect interests of the corporate elite in their backdoor dealings with various media outlets.
- Apocryphon 4y ago> No government entity should be involved in the slightest in policing media in order to "protect" elections. It's very subjective and extremely ripe for abuse. The FEC can impose all sorts of fines, they arguably have more teeth than this.
- colordrops 4y agoLet me clarify: they should not be involved in "policing the particulars of content posted on media".
- Apocryphon 4y agohttps://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1400166091586932736 https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1400166091586932736
- lp0_on_fire 4y agoThe FBI says "won't someone rid me of this meddlesome priest?" while the majority party in congress is dragging social media CEOs to testify about content moderation isn't enough to make you at the very least, suspicious?
- Apocryphon 4y agoBased on Taibbi's reporting it sounds like they were nonsectarian in the priests they complained about.
- djur 4y agoThe FBI said they are "notifying you of the below accounts which may potentially constitute violations of Twitter's Terms of Service for any action or inaction deemed appropriate within Twitter policy". One of the accounts was an account parodying a pro wrestler by suggesting he frequently poops in his pants. Not really seeing any evidence of a coordinated political agenda here.