2 ms·
No one (at least no one of note) ever claimed that government coercion of social media was a "good thing". The controversy around the "Twitter Files" was (and
by ajross 1y ago
No one (at least no one of note) ever claimed that government coercion of social media was a "good thing". The controversy around the "Twitter Files" was (and remains) whether any such coercion[1] actually happened. Do remember the smoking gun request for a takedown turned out to have been penis photos.
But for the record, since consistent propriety is the subject of the subthread: as a left-leaning liberal, I hereby declare that I think coercing Twitter to remove content for political reasons is equally as bad as doing the same to Facebook.
[1] Not least because the entity doing the coercing was not the government, which was run by Biden's opponent.
- phendrenad2 1y ago> as a left-leaning liberal, I hereby declare I know that's how it works on the internet: All it takes to negate thousands of people with one opinion is for someone to come out and identify with them and say the opposite. Just one person! Likewise, if thousands of people believe something, as long as they say "nobody ever claimed THAT!" then, it's as though they never believed it (despite it being obvious from every other indicator that they DO, in fact, believe that). Unfortunately, it's all just silly internet sophistry and the real world happily ignores it.
- ajross 1y ago> All it takes to negate thousands of people with one opinion ... thousands? You haven't cited even one! Which, as I eagerly point out, is exactly one fewer example than I provided. So even accepting your dismissal as framed, I win. By a lot. Seems to me that it's the person asserting the existence of a conspiracy that needs to be the one coming to the table with evidence.
- phendrenad2 1y agoYou're right, you win, by a lot. The real world is rearranging itself to comply with your interent win as we speak! Thank goodness you were here to save us all!