Trump just lost his twitter forever.

[superdave]

I read a report that said that almost 38% of all covid misinformation could be traced to Donald Trump's Twitter. He is responsible for the deaths of thousands.

found it....

Study Finds ‘Single Largest Driver’ of Coronavirus Misinformation: Trump

Cornell University researchers analyzing 38 million English-language articles about the pandemic found that President Trump was the largest driver of the “infodemic.”

www.nytimes.com

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/evanega-et-al-coronavirus-misinformation-submitted-07-23-20-1/080839ac0c22bca8/full.pdf

 

[Glurin]

If somebody writes crap on Twitter, his account will be banned. Why should that be any different for Trump? That wasn't meant as support for the Democrats, but keeping up netiquette. It wasn't disgusting, but the opposite, a hygiene matter. Disgusting was what Trump did on Twitter.

Yeah, see, that's the problem. If the rule is anyone who writes crap on Twitter gets banned, then anyone who writes crap on Twitter should be banned. But that's not what's happening. The rule is being selectively enforced. Case in point: "For those who have asked, I will not be attending the inauguration." That's inciting violence, according to Twitter and the democrats. However it almost takes an act of God just to get a warning label on anything from the Ayatollah.

Edit: Twitter, not Titter *facepalm* I couldn't leave that uncorrected, too embarrassing.

Hmm. Not sure I'd ever want to see anything posted by Trump on Titter. Or just about any politician for that matter. Talk about nightmare fuel.

 

[superdave]

Yeah, see, that's the problem. If the rule is anyone who writes crap on Twitter gets banned, then anyone who writes crap on Twitter should be banned. But that's not what's happening.

They are. Ask Merv if he got his account back yet.

 

[krischan]

Well, Twitter doesn't do it for a greater good, of course, but because they hope to have an advantage on the long turn. BTW, the US constitution only disallows the state to obstruct freedom of speech if I'm not mistaken.

 

[superdave]

Well, Twitter doesn't do it for a greater good, of course, but because they hope to have an advantage on the long turn. BTW, the US constitution only disallows the state to obstruct freedom of speech if I'm not mistaken.

Yes, there are no 1A protections on social media like Twitter.

 

[Glurin]

Yeah, that's kind of a major sticking point. The first amendment does indeed protect Twitter as a private entity in that respect. Not to mention they are able to abuse section 230 to avoid prosecution for anything the first amendment doesn't protect them from. In essence not only have they become the primary means of communication for the public (which in and of itself is a pretty depressing commentary on the state of society), but they have also effectively been rendered immune from any and all prosecution for any wrongdoing on their part.

Quick sidebar, Twitter has just publicly condemned Uganda for shutting down social media commentary on their elections as "hugely harmful, violate basic human rights and the principles of the #OpenInternet."

 

[krischan]

I don't care about the reasoning of commercial enterprises about human rights etc. It's just a facade. I would think better of them if they plainly said "we do it to improve business".

 

[Glurin]

I don't care about the reasoning of commercial enterprises about human rights etc. It's just a facade. I would think better of them if they plainly said "we do it to improve business".

Oh but wait, it gets even better. Apparently a small ISP in the northwest has been flooded with requests from their customers to block Facebook and Twitter from their service entirely, and the ISP has agreed citing the social media companies' recent onslaught of censorship activity as the reason for doing so. At least for those customers who requested it at any rate. The response from the left, naturally, has been in short "Private companies shouldn't be allowed to censor people by deciding what can and can't be on their platform! That's our job!"

While I do find the situation somewhat poetic, I'm not sure I like the idea of fighting censorship with censorship. Kinda gives me that net neutrality vibe where the spirit of it is something I can absolutely get behind, but the implementation is just begging for really bad trouble.