It appears Twitter is now in the fact checking business using sources such as CNN and The Bezos Post. Slippery slope for the platform deciding to become a publisher.
This should get interesting.
“Hey babe. After you’re done making breakfast, gotta show you what I read on twitter about twitter. Stupid libs.”
*wife exhales deeply”
“Yes. Yes. CNN bad. Trump amazing. Keeps winning. Obama Hillary Biden....”
I agree I don't think this is a good idea.
Everyone knows Trump lies, all this will do is fire up his base about biased media, fake news etc.
Also most of Trump's tweets don't contain any facts to check, more just terrible opinions.
(05-27-2020, 08:47 AM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]I agree I don't think this is a good idea.
Everyone knows Trump lies, all this will do is fire up his base about biased media, fake news etc.
Also most of Trump's tweets don't contain any facts to check, more just terrible opinions.
And ones where he criticized Obama for doing something and then 4 years later does the exact same thing.
Just so I am clear, you guys have no issue with Yoel Roth, an employee with a documented history of hating conservatives holding the position of "Head of Site Integrity"?
If Twitter wants to be regulated as a publisher, I am cool with that.
(05-27-2020, 08:55 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 08:54 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]And ones where he criticized Obama for doing something and then 4 years later does the exact same thing.
There's always a tweet.
You people do understand this is one of the very few ways Trump can speak directly to the people without the fake news filter of the MSM, right?
(05-27-2020, 08:58 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Just so I am clear, you guys have no issue with Yoel Roth, an employee with a documented history of hating conservatives holding the position of "Head of Site Integrity"?
If Twitter wants to be regulated as a publisher, I am cool with that.
(05-27-2020, 08:55 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]There's always a tweet.
You people do understand this is one of the very few ways Trump can speak directly to the people without the fake news filter of the MSM, right?
And he manages to fumble that ball more often than not.
(05-27-2020, 08:58 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Just so I am clear, you guys have no issue with Yoel Roth, an employee with a documented history of hating conservatives holding the position of "Head of Site Integrity"?
If Twitter wants to be regulated as a publisher, I am cool with that.
(05-27-2020, 08:55 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]There's always a tweet.
You people do understand this is one of the very few ways Trump can speak directly to the people without the fake news filter of the MSM, right?
You realize that has nothing to do with being a hypocrite right?
(05-27-2020, 09:00 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 08:58 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Just so I am clear, you guys have no issue with Yoel Roth, an employee with a documented history of hating conservatives holding the position of "Head of Site Integrity"?
If Twitter wants to be regulated as a publisher, I am cool with that.
You people do understand this is one of the very few ways Trump can speak directly to the people without the fake news filter of the MSM, right?
And he manages to fumble that ball more often than not.
Are you ok with the "fact checker"? You skipped that part.
(05-27-2020, 09:01 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 08:58 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Just so I am clear, you guys have no issue with Yoel Roth, an employee with a documented history of hating conservatives holding the position of "Head of Site Integrity"?
If Twitter wants to be regulated as a publisher, I am cool with that.
You people do understand this is one of the very few ways Trump can speak directly to the people without the fake news filter of the MSM, right?
You realize that has nothing to do with being a hypocrite right?
Are you ok with the "fact checker"? You skipped that part.
(05-27-2020, 09:01 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 09:00 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]And he manages to fumble that ball more often than not.
Are you ok with the "fact checker"? You skipped that part.
(05-27-2020, 09:01 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]You realize that has nothing to do with being a hypocrite right?
Are you ok with the "fact checker"? You skipped that part.
Couldn’t care less.
If you don’t like twitter, don’t go on it. Fairly simple.
(05-27-2020, 09:08 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 09:01 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Are you ok with the "fact checker"? You skipped that part.
Are you ok with the "fact checker"? You skipped that part.
I don't care.
Of course you don't care about the masters of the universe trying to impact an election (again).
(05-27-2020, 09:13 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 09:08 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care.
Of course you don't care about the masters of the universe trying to impact an election (again).
You considering Jack Dorsey as a master of the universe says a lot more about you than it does me.
(05-27-2020, 09:22 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 09:13 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Of course you don't care about the masters of the universe trying to impact an election (again).
You considering Jack Dorsey as a master of the universe says a lot more about you than it does me.
A single guy who controls the content 350M+ worldwide users see is the master of something.
(05-27-2020, 09:30 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 09:22 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]You considering Jack Dorsey as a master of the universe says a lot more about you than it does me.
A single guy who controls the content 350M+ worldwide users see is the master of something.
And yet, he runs a company well within its rights in our capitalist society to do as they choose. I would've thought you'd be behind such a right. Do you support the christian bakers who didn't want to bake a wedding cake for a homosexual couple?
(05-27-2020, 09:35 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 09:30 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]A single guy who controls the content 350M+ worldwide users see is the master of something.
And yet, he runs a company well within its rights in our capitalist society to do as they choose. I would've thought you'd be behind such a right. Do you support the christian bakers who didn't want to bake a wedding cake for a homosexual couple?
Lol
“I need my backup! Someone come help!”
(05-27-2020, 09:35 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 09:30 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]A single guy who controls the content 350M+ worldwide users see is the master of something.
And yet, he runs a company well within its rights in our capitalist society to do as they choose. I would've thought you'd be behind such a right. Do you support the christian bakers who didn't want to bake a wedding cake for a homosexual couple?
I said I am fine with it if they want to go down the road of being regulated. I think that would be in the best interest of everyone.
(05-27-2020, 09:40 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2020, 09:35 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]And yet, he runs a company well within its rights in our capitalist society to do as they choose. I would've thought you'd be behind such a right. Do you support the christian bakers who didn't want to bake a wedding cake for a homosexual couple?
I said I am fine with it if they want to go down the road of being regulated. I think that would be in the best interest of everyone.
Exactly. At current, the Big tech Social Media firms are exempt from liability because they claim the status as "neutral platforms." If you want to take on the responsibility of editing content, then that means you need to take on the liability for the content that you allow to be published.