Twitter says it 'inadvertently' limited engagements on Trump's flagged tweets
reuters.com
reuters.com
The president of the US as an office has public, secure communication channels, Donald Trump, having signed the same TOS like anyone else, should be treated like everyone else. Not exactly sure why Twitter feels the need to be apologetic about how they moderate their platform.
This account should receive no special privileges. It’s asinine that Twitter ignores their own rules just to appease this man.
I disagree. Given that many of those folks have not only continued to engage with the soon-to-be ex-POTUS, even to the extent that they are happy to be suckers...err......donors to his grift[0]...err.."Election Defense Fund", I'd think that Twitter would want to keep those folks around -- the more gullible someone is, the more likely they'll click on ads and generate revenue.
And advertisers stand to make money on conversions, assuming those folks haven't already given all their money to the Trump "Election Defense" con...err...fundraising drive.
[0] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-fundra...
Fundamentally, the government can't dictate what anybody chooses to publish (or not) on a website that they own. They can seize it and prosecute the owners if the content is illegal, but they can't force editorial decisions.
This whole arrangement drove a lot of traffic to Twitter and helped to keep it relevant; they just didn't want to kill their golden goose.
IIRC, there was a lawsuit that ruled that the president was not allowed to block other twitter users. As far as I know, it would still be totally withing twitter's right to block Trump, if it wanted. But I think they don't because what he says on Twitter reveals important information about his character.
Also, the president generally gets special privileges on media platforms because he is the president. That's just common sense.
Assuming you are american, I can't believe there are people actually advocating for big tech to censor the president. It just sounds insane to me that anyone would support such an idea.
Didn't Twitter even explicitly carve out an exemption for 'political figures'? Which let's be honest means Trump.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions#List_of_no...
Also think we need to be careful about the term "misinformation" as that can at times mean my opinion vs your opinion. For instance Fauci flipped on masks several times (im not hating on the guy)...but which time was it misinformation and not misinformation? This is exactly why people need to be entitled to their opinions in a free expression form. You can direct the conversation without kicking people off and censoring people. Another example is Twitter completely flopping when censoring the NY Post "misinformation" which turned out to be undeniably true.
It's like snowflakes run amok at a major media platform.
It is was nothing burger and actually made Biden look good for the many families dealing with drug addiction.
I can't wait for the Trump clown show led by head jester Giuliani to end on the 20th Jan.
> A statement from the team said Hunter had "fought through difficult challenges, including the vicious personal attacks of recent months, only to emerge stronger".
> The 50-year-old said he had learned of the investigation on Tuesday. He did not disclose any further details.
> "I take this matter very seriously but I am confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately, including with the benefit of professional tax advisers," he said.
Anyway, this Hunter Biden thing is like trying to smear Devin Nunes with the antics of Anthony Nunes (https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2012/09/15/police-san-leandro-m...).
Absolutely. Especially because Frank Luntz is completely non-partisan and has no interest in helping Biden's opposition[0]:
"Frank Ian Luntz (born February 23, 1962) is an American political and communications consultant, pollster and pundit,[1][2] best known for developing talking points and other messaging for the Republican causes. His work has included assistance with messaging for Newt Gingrich's Contract with America, and public relations support for pro-Israel policies in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. He advocated use of vocabulary crafted to produce a desired effect; including use of the term death tax instead of estate tax, and climate change instead of global warming.
Luntz has frequently contributed to Fox News as a commentator and analyst, as well as running focus groups during and after presidential debates on CBSN.[3] Luntz describes his specialty as "testing language and finding words that will help his clients sell their product or turn public opinion on an issue or a candidate."[4] He is also an author of business books dealing with communication strategies and public opinion."
Get off your bourgeois partisan high horse and read the damn emails and Luntz's response (he was included in one of the produced email chains)
And by the way, Luntz is anti-Trump -- though I presume your knee-jerk reaction to this story indicates that you think it's some right-wing conspiracy.
I'll let the relevant authorities do so. As I understand it, they have a laptop or the contents thereof, and are conducting an investigation.
If that investigation warrants charging Hunter Biden with any crimes, he can be tried by a jury of his peers and, if convicted, punished appropriately.
Adherence to the law isn't (or at least shouldn't be) a partisan issue, nor have I made any statement to that effect.
If you believe you have uncovered some relevant evidence, I suggest you take it to the authorities for further investigation.
Thank you for sharing your point of view.
The idealism of free speech was invented in a time where village idiots could harass a maximum of perhaps hundred people and convince about 2. Now they can harass millions of people, and convince the same 2%, but now that two percent is a huge amount of people.
The amount of damage these village idiots can cause is now a civilization breaking power. Why would we not fight against it?