Twitter

[agammaglobulin]

Both things can be true - Stormy Daniels and Hunter Biden stories. Difference is (and the point being made by Taibbi/Twitter) - admin on twitter were told by Biden's team, who had a direction connection w Twitter, to delete posts/users who were releasing info on Hunter Biden. And Twitter complied. I'm yet to see evidence of Twitter deleting Stormy Daniels stories. Twitter intentionally suppressed information from being released that could've impacted the election at the request of Biden team. Twitter deleted NY Post's twitter account for weeks leading up to the election. I hope you can see the political bias/interference.

I think what Musk, and others who see Twitter as a new, direct news source (vs legacy media - CNN, Fox News, NYT, etc), would say is that both Stormy Daniels AND Hunter Biden stories should be allowed to be published and be discussed in the digital public square (Twitter). Unfortunately, the legacy media choses what to discuss/publish based on their opinion/political preference.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted875186]

@chessknt , @vector2 , @Arch Guillotti , @dipriMAN (and others)…

You guys aren’t bothered the least about the fact that a news organization (doesn’t matter which) tried to publish (what is now known to be 100% true) a story (doesn’t matter the story) and the government (doesn’t matter if it was Dems or republicans) used back channels and influence to get a private company to ban the story? That doesn’t bother you?

To help a specific narrative, the CIA manufactured a complete and utter lie about the origin of the story saying that it was from a scary foreign government. This doesn’t bother you?

And then, the main stream media outlets, all knowing this, we’re 100% silent - or even defended and pushed the false narrative created by the CIA - and have NEVER admitted to it or apologize. Not even a little bothered?

None of this bothers you in the least? That is really a rhetorical question…no need to respond to this post. Please don’t.

But I would ask you to ponder just for a moment …. Ask yourself personally why this level of corruption doesn’t bother you. Ask yourself why you are defending this behavior and criticizing those who are speaking out against it on a forum. Is it perhaps (and I really have no idea why you guys feel this way) that you are really really political and the name of the side you are on means more than what that side actually does? I hope not…but what do I know.

None of us are saying we approve of hunter biden, and if this level of corruption to cover up a story is confirmed then yes it is very scarey.

I think most of us just agree that it’s nothing compared to other current and past events, and honestly is not the big deal the republicans are making it out to be. We have a president that tried to overthrow an election and become a dictator, yet no republican would impeach him for it, o republican will speak out against it, and we are in the same place a few years later, but sure your deeply upset about a laptop story.

 

[agammaglobulin]

None of us are saying we approve of hunter biden, and if this level of corruption to cover up a story is confirmed then yes it is very scarey.

I think most of us just agree that it’s nothing compared to other current and past events, and honestly is not the big deal the republicans are making it out to be. We have a president that tried to overthrow an election and become a dictator, yet no republican would impeach him for it, o republican will speak out against it, and we are in the same place a few years later, but sure your deeply upset about a laptop story.

It’s not the laptop story people are shocked by. It’s the cover-up and level of influence Biden and his team (party?) had over a major news source to control the narrative. Direct communication between a presidential candidates team and Twitter, controlling what tweets to delete and accounts to be removed.

All while Biden is saying the story is untrue and made up by the Russians.

 

[epidural man]

None of us are saying we approve of hunter biden, and if this level of corruption to cover up a story is confirmed then yes it is very scarey.

I think most of us just agree that it’s nothing compared to other current and past events, and honestly is not the big deal the republicans are making it out to be. We have a president that tried to overthrow an election and become a dictator, yet no republican would impeach him for it, o republican will speak out against it, and we are in the same place a few years later, but sure your deeply upset about a laptop story.

Yeah, attempt of the government overthrow was awful too. Absolutely.

Call out evil where it exists and leave politics behind. That is what I say.

And thank heavens for guys like Matt Taibbi who are doing just that.

So what should we say about the people who are critical of people like him?

 

[deleted1147063]

He funneled just as many dollars to the GOP using dark money. It was just better PR for his facade of a public image to be associated with Democrats. Play both sides so you never lose, you know.

And he admits to a felony?

 

[epidural man]

lolwut. Are you talking about Fox news killing the story of trump and the bimbo stormy right before the election?

Yep. Horrible. Fox should be criticized at every turn until they start reporting honestly…just like ALL news outlets that have selective outrage.

 

[epidural man]

Or Fox News having talking heads texting with Trump officials to control the Jan 6th narrative. Or Fox News having talking heads stump for Trump on the election trail.

@epidural man i have no idea what you’re talking about to be honest. Send me a link. But where were you when the above was going on? I’m sure you were here posting about how corrupt that was, amirite?

What do you mean where was I?

Probably making fun of anyone who ever defended Trump.

Although to be honest, I have also defended Trump at times - not because I wanted to, but because people make stuff up about him and truth matters.

Sometimes I felt like this guy - Gary

 

[vector2]

. Twitter intentionally suppressed information from being released that could've impacted the election at the request of Biden team. .

This is just your intentional, misleading spin, right? Either that or you really don't know the facts of this case that's got you all wound up.

The email and correspondence record is clear that the Twitter admin team was not sure as to the source of the information and was actively debating what to do with it. There were people who thought it should be released and people who thought something like this had to be the result of a hacking operation (imagine that, thinking that incredibly sensitive pictures on a Iaptop might've been hacked). And after the fact when we all learned the actual source of the laptop, Dorsey publicly apologized and Yoel Roth publicly said that blocking the link to the ny post was a mistake.

Ultimately, this "scandal" contains pretty much nothing of importance that wasn't already learned last year.


See:

 

[agammaglobulin]

This is from a twitter admin. "More to review from the Biden team".

 

[agammaglobulin]

How could Twitter possibly be biased when 98-99% of donations coming from Twitter employees go to the DNC?

 

[agammaglobulin]

"18. Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be “unsafe.” They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, e.g. child pornography." - Taibbi reporting on Twitter files re Hunter Biden laptop story.

Vector, are we reading the same thing???

 

[vector2]

Vector, are we reading the same thing???

I dunno, are we??? I guess this is the hard hitting laptop "data" that you couldnt wait to get your hands on?




Again, please tell us, where's your outrage that the Trump WH (the actual people in governmental power at the time) made requests to the Twitter team for removals and those requests were honored?

 

[agammaglobulin]

Twitter after the election: "Oops we didn't mean to prevent spread of negative Biden info before the election. We just banned, deleted and prevented if from being spread like it was child porn."

Sorry, I don't buy it. Kind of like earlier suggestions that SBF donates millions to republicans.

 

[Neopolymath]

I'm currently using Twitter for it's intended us, which is arguing what's harder, kicking a PAT or making a PK? Ex-NFL kicker has said he's willing to bet 100k that he can make a PK on any goalkeeper in the world and he's getting roasted. That's MY Twitter.

As someone who has done both that person is stupidly wrong.

 

[deleted1147063]

lolwut. Are you talking about Fox news killing the story of trump and the bimbo stormy right before the election?

I used to have different expectations from the Biden and the Trump teams.

 

[Twiggidy]

It’s not the laptop story people are shocked by. It’s the cover-up and level of influence Biden and his team (party?) had over a major news source to control the narrative. Direct communication between a presidential candidates team and Twitter, controlling what tweets to delete and accounts to be removed.

All while Biden is saying the story is untrue and made up by the Russians.

Legit question. Is it any different if someone steals my laptop and posts my secret Kansas City barbecue sauce recipe on SDN and I asks the admins to take it down? What the Biden campaign did is literally what every IG model does when their nudes are stolen and posted on Reddit.

 

[BobLoblaw78]

Legit question. Is it any different if someone steals my laptop and posts my secret Kansas City barbecue sauce recipe on SDN and I asks the admins to take it down? What the Biden campaign did is literally what every IG model does when their nudes are stolen and posted on Reddit.

No one stole anything. That is the difference. If that is hunter’s only defense, he is in trouble.

(He forfeited the laptop at the computer repair shop. Which after a certain amount of time make it legally the property of the shop owner)

 

[nimbus]

How is it censorship if anybody with a smartphone can access all the NYPost Hunter Biden stories in 10 seconds from the comfort of their own homes?

hunter biden | New York Post

Get the latest hunter biden news, articles, videos and photos on the New York Post.

nypost.com

 

[Twiggidy]

No one stole anything. That is the difference. If that is hunter’s only defense, he is in trouble.

(He forfeited the laptop at the computer repair shop. Which after a certain amount of time make it legally the property of the shop owner)

The point I'm making is Twitter is more like SDN than it is a news organization like Fox. I do think there's some rule somewhere if a person's private stuff is posted on a forum, which Twitter basically is, they can ask the admins of the forums to take it down. Not it can't be eventually found elsewhere. Hell, even on here, the mere reference of mentioning where someone is located and they don't want that known results in the post being taken down.

Anyway. It’s Twitter. As I said, I don’t go there for my news

 

[thinkorswim]

And he admits to a felony?

What felony are you referring to exactly?

Citizens United opened the door for unlimited dark money to buy our elections and politicians. Nothing illegal there.

The whole FTX collapse, yeah he should be behind bars for that.

 

[thinkorswim]

No one stole anything. That is the difference. If that is hunter’s only defense, he is in trouble.

(He forfeited the laptop at the computer repair shop. Which after a certain amount of time make it legally the property of the shop owner)

The content falls under “revenge porn” laws, so how it was obtained is irrelevant. It’s illegal to spread explicit content of an individual without their consent. As far as I know, that’s what was mostly suppressed by Twitter.

 

[BobLoblaw78]

The content falls under “revenge porn” laws, so how it was obtained is irrelevant. It’s illegal to spread explicit content of an individual without their consent. As far as I know, that’s what was mostly suppressed by Twitter.

Idk about his porn and who in the world would wanna see that? Regardless, I gathered that he had videos of drugs and weapons that he was bragging about. I know the drugs are illegal but I think he is not allowed a firearm either. The porn thing is new to me but I’ve seen it mentioned several times now

 

[epidural man]

If you don't follow 3YearLetterman account it is comedy gold. Guy agitates right and left... its a great follow for laughs.

Ok followed.

Ann Lesby is quit funny.

 

[chessknt]

@chessknt , @vector2 , @Arch Guillotti , @dipriMAN (and others)…

You guys aren’t bothered the least about the fact that a news organization (doesn’t matter which) tried to publish (what is now known to be 100% true) a story (doesn’t matter the story) and the government (doesn’t matter if it was Dems or republicans) used back channels and influence to get a private company to ban the story? That doesn’t bother you?

To help a specific narrative, the CIA manufactured a complete and utter lie about the origin of the story saying that it was from a scary foreign government. This doesn’t bother you?

And then, the main stream media outlets, all knowing this, we’re 100% silent - or even defended and pushed the false narrative created by the CIA - and have NEVER admitted to it or apologize. Not even a little bothered?

None of this bothers you in the least? That is really a rhetorical question…no need to respond to this post. Please don’t.

But I would ask you to ponder just for a moment …. Ask yourself personally why this level of corruption doesn’t bother you. Ask yourself why you are defending this behavior and criticizing those who are speaking out against it on a forum. Is it perhaps (and I really have no idea why you guys feel this way) that you are really really political and the name of the side you are on means more than what that side actually does? I hope not…but what do I know.

No it doesn't because that has been happening since the inception of the media. If the government used the threat or act of physical violence or blackmail or black ops **** to suppress the story now that is a different league entirely but I have yet to hear that happen.

There is no such thing as a completely free press with no bias or political machinations. If is as delusional as Bernie's free unicorn rainbow college to think that it could ever exist and reeks of idealistic neo-libertarianism think tank horse**** the right peddles to get people to vote for them out of protest that the left has some sort of imaginary control over the media and thus the process of thought. It clearly works but it is patently ludicrous to think that the media is being controlled like China by any one party. What country is doing media better right now that we should model ourselves after and what makes it that way?

 

[deleted1147063]

What felony are you referring to exactly?

Citizens United opened the door for unlimited dark money to buy our elections and politicians. Nothing illegal there.

The whole FTX collapse, yeah he should be behind bars for that.

I misunderstood the concept of (legal) dark money.

 

[ambiturner]

I’ll tell you what, as someone who never used twitter before and does not have an account I have heard more about twitter and seen more tweets in the past 2 weeks than I ever have. So if the goal was to get people to start talking about it again, mission accomplished?

 

[epidural man]

No it doesn't because that has been happening since the inception of the media. If the government used the threat or act of physical violence or blackmail or black ops **** to suppress the story now that is a different league entirely but I have yet to hear that happen.

There is no such thing as a completely free press with no bias or political machinations. If is as delusional as Bernie's free unicorn rainbow college to think that it could ever exist and reeks of idealistic neo-libertarianism think tank horse**** the right peddles to get people to vote for them out of protest that the left has some sort of imaginary control over the media and thus the process of thought. It clearly works but it is patently ludicrous to think that the media is being controlled like China by any one party. What country is doing media better right now that we should model ourselves after and what makes it that way?

I for one, am saddened by your response.

 

[chessknt]

I for one, am saddened by your response.

Do you have a better media environment we should be striving to emulate and an explanation for the factors that led to that environment? Do you think the media in the 60s was not influenced by the government? The 40s?

 

[tombreaz]

lolwut. Are you talking about Fox news killing the story of trump and the bimbo stormy right before the election?

The "Trump/bimbo" story was paraded everywhere. Avenatti got so much PR because of it-so what in the world are you talking about??

And I'd be careful with using the word "bimbo". The language police are very sensitive on your side of the aisle.

 

[epidural man]

Do you have a better media environment we should be striving to emulate and an explanation for the factors that led to that environment? Do you think the media in the 60s was not influenced by the government? The 40s?

My new term for the month is “selective outrage.”

I’m just bothered by selective outrage.

I got that from the Chris Rock/Dave Chapelle show I saw on Saturday. Chris coined the term. He used the example of people that listen to Michael Jackson but won’t listen R. Kelly. “Same crime. One just made better songs.”

 

[Ezekiel2517]

 

[Ezekiel2517]

I’ll tell you what, as someone who never used twitter before and does not have an account I have heard more about twitter and seen more tweets in the past 2 weeks than I ever have. So if the goal was to get people to start talking about it again, mission accomplished?

My guess is the goal is more likely to get back all the advertisers and money that's left the platform. But I'm no mastermind like Elon.

 

[chessknt]

My new term for the month is “selective outrage.”

I’m just bothered by selective outrage.

I got that from the Chris Rock/Dave Chapelle show I saw on Saturday. Chris coined the term. He used the example of people that listen to Michael Jackson but won’t listen R. Kelly. “Same crime. One just made better songs.”

You don't feel like your selective outrage over Twitter/'the left' rings hollow now? Were you this outraged when Obama's heritage was called in to question? Or Al gore for his verbal gaffes and inventing the internet? Everyone has selective outrage, it is called bias....

I am still waiting to hear where/who gets this right in your estimation since our system is such a warped and biased travesty.

 

[BobLoblaw78]

My new term for the month is “selective outrage.”

I’m just bothered by selective outrage.

I got that from the Chris Rock/Dave Chapelle show I saw on Saturday. Chris coined the term. He used the example of people that listen to Michael Jackson but won’t listen R. Kelly. “Same crime. One just made better songs.”

I cant beleev u picked this subject over other topics to get upset about…

 

[nimbus]

My guess is the goal is more likely to get back all the advertisers and money that's left the platform. But I'm no mastermind like Elon.

View attachment 362957

If only Musk could lure Trump back to Twitter. That would drive up traffic on Twitter and bring back advertisers. It would be a big coup for Musk and Twitter.

 

[epidural man]

You don't feel like your selective outrage over Twitter/'the left' rings hollow now? Were you this outraged when Obama's heritage was called in to question? Or Al gore for his verbal gaffes and inventing the internet? Everyone has selective outrage, it is called bias....

I am still waiting to hear where/who gets this right in your estimation since our system is such a warped and biased travesty

You don't feel like your selective outrage over Twitter/'the left' rings hollow now? Were you this outraged when Obama's heritage was called in to question? Or Al gore for his verbal gaffes and inventing the internet? Everyone has selective outrage, it is called bias....

I am still waiting to hear where/who gets this right in your estimation since our system is such a warped and biased travesty.

I don’t have outrage. I am a pretty reasonable and happy person.

My comment was directed more to those who seem to see the world through blue or red lenses - and some on here are extreme with this. That is selective outrage.

I am striving to see the world through principles.

I’m not sure there is anything to “get right.”

The whole point was to laugh at those who get mad over things that I now have a term for (thanks Chris Rock).

 

[epidural man]

You don't feel like your selective outrage over Twitter/'the left' rings hollow now? Were you this outraged when Obama's heritage was called in to question? Or Al gore for his verbal gaffes and inventing the internet? Everyone has selective outrage, it is called bias....

I am still waiting to hear where/who gets this right in your estimation since our system is such a warped and biased travesty.

Also,

I disagree with you. Selective outrage to me means that some are unwilling to see the errors of their own camp despite overwhelming evidence. They say things like “well what about…”, or “yeah well Billy in your camp did the same thing and what he did was worse”, or “where were you when…”

We all have bias of course,, but there are MANY who call BS to power - on either side, and will stand by it no matter the political cost or scrutiny.

Some get absolutely crucified for it.

Russel Brand - an extreme leftist has been called an Alt-right nut job or Nazi because he calls BS to power. MIT Romney has voted for more republican bills than any other and he is called a RINO (I can’t even wrap my head around how anyone can even make that claim and still claim they have the ability of abstract thought), etc.

 

[LaryngoSpazz]

So Elon confirmed today that some political candidates were shadow banned by twitter executives leading up to the election. Can we at least all agree that this was wrong?

 

[epidural man]

So Elon confirmed today that some political candidates were shadow banned by twitter executives leading up to the election. Can we at least all agree that this was wrong?

Depends on the candidates.

Do they support my issues? Totally wrong.

Are they in the other camp? Then it was totally justified and they probably espouse hate speech or eating babies in the basement of a pizza restaurant.

 

[agammaglobulin]

What Twitter Files has shown, and what the problem is:
(1) There was no transparency. They lied about shadow banning and search banning.
(2) Banning/Blocking was not evenly enforced. Conservative and conservative viewpoints were specifically targeted. NY Mag banned for "false" Hunter Biden story. Dr. Bhattacharya, Stanford Professor, MD,PHD, tweets blocked for saying COVID lockdowns could harm children. More examples on Twitter. Vijaya Gadde, Head of Legal Policy and Trust and Kayvon Beykpour the former Head of Product, wrote in a Twitter post in 2018 that, "And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology"

To the dems out there who think this is a nothing burger- Imagine if Rachel Maddow/NYT was kicked off Twitter 3 weeks prior to the presidential election by a company that says they never shadow ban or censor posts? I think you're being intellectually dishonest if you say that's not significant.

If Twitter wants to shadow ban and search ban - they should just do it and say why. It's their product, their company, they are free to do this. But to say with certainty, on multiple platforms, in front of congress, that there is no censorship while you are actively censoring/banning/blocking people is ridiculous.

 

[agammaglobulin]

Twitter Files:




Bari Weiss

@bariweiss


11. “We control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do,” one Twitter engineer told us. Two additional Twitter employees confirmed.

 

[nimbus]

What Twitter Files has shown, and what the problem is:
(1) There was no transparency. They lied about shadow banning and search banning.
(2) Banning/Blocking was not evenly enforced. Conservative and conservative viewpoints were specifically targeted. NY Mag banned for "false" Hunter Biden story. Dr. Bhattacharya, Stanford Professor, MD,PHD, tweets blocked for saying COVID lockdowns could harm children. More examples on Twitter. Vijaya Gadde, Head of Legal Policy and Trust and Kayvon Beykpour the former Head of Product, wrote in a Twitter post in 2018 that, "And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology"

To the dems out there who think this is a nothing burger- Imagine if Rachel Maddow/NYT was kicked off Twitter 3 weeks prior to the presidential election by a company that says they never shadow ban or censor posts? I think you're being intellectually dishonest if you say that's not significant.

If Twitter wants to shadow ban and search ban - they should just do it and say why. It's their product, their company, they are free to do this. But to say with certainty, on multiple platforms, in front of congress, that there is no censorship while you are actively censoring/banning/blocking people is ridiculous.

Twitter, like foxnews, is entertainment. There are plenty of conservative media and social media platforms available for people who prefer their entertainment with a conservative flavor. You don’t see liberals whining endlessly about content moderation on Parler and Truth Social. If I want to read the NYTIMES, I just read the NYTIMES. If I want to read the NYPOST, I just read the NYPOST. I don’t rely on Twitter to spoonfeed it to me. It’s entertainment and it’s a nothingburger.

I have Canadian friend who says Americans are very good at getting angry about nothing.

 

[agammaglobulin]

Disagree. Twitter is nothing like Fox News/NYT. Twitter, along with Google /Facebook, are the gatekeepers for information and speech in our digital society. There are no competitors. Who uses yahoo/myspace/parlor? No one. Meta/Google/Twitter , in my opinion, have a responsibility to disclose what they are censoring. Especially if they are publicly stating there is no censorship on their platform.

Most people get their news from social media. This is why authoritarian governments (China) heavily regulate these platforms. Print/legacy media (CNN/Fox, NYT, etc) will soon be gone.

Why did the Biden team control the narrative at Twitter by making requests for banning/shadow banning people if it doesn't matter and Twitter is just entertainment?

 

[agammaglobulin]

Have y'all heard about Jim Baker? The former FBI agent who lead the approval of the FISA warrant in the FBI Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax. Well, after resigning from the FBI due to facing criminal investigation for leaks to the press, he became the deputy general counsel at Twitter. He was the one regulating what twitter files were being turned over to Matt Taibbi during his investigation of twitter for Twitter Files part 1. Prior to Musk takeover, he was helping make blacklist account decisions on the platform and suppressing the Hunter Biden story. Read here on WSJ. Perfectly normal for a partisan national security official to hold a position like this at an entertainment company.

 

[LaryngoSpazz]

Twitter, like foxnews, is entertainment. There are plenty of conservative media and social media platforms available for people who prefer their entertainment with a conservative flavor. You don’t see liberals whining endlessly about content moderation on Parler and Truth Social. If I want to read the NYTIMES, I just read the NYTIMES. If I want to read the NYPOST, I just read the NYPOST. I don’t rely on Twitter to spoonfeed it to me. It’s entertainment and it’s a nothingburger.

I have Canadian friend who says Americans are very good at getting angry about nothing.

I respect your anesthesia knowledge tremendously but your opinion on this doesn’t make sense. Are all channels entertainment (like PBS, CNN, CBS, etc) or just fox news and twitter?

Liberals did whine a lot about content moderation on conservative flavored sites like parler and truth social. To the point that Amazon, apple, and Google booted them off their web hosting services last year.

Secondly if you want to read The NY Times you are free to read their opinions in print or follow them thru twitter. If you want to read the NY Post, good luck finding them on Twitter. They were booted from twitter for correctly reporting the hunter Biden laptop story.

If twitter is just entertainment then why was the fbi meeting with them to moderate content?

Your Canadian friend is right we do make big issues out of small things sometimes but this is not one of them. I think bottom line you agree with the politics of the situation here so you don’t see a problem in this case.

 

[nimbus]

I respect your anesthesia knowledge tremendously but your opinion on this doesn’t make sense. Are all channels entertainment (like PBS, CNN, CBS, etc) or just fox news and twitter?

Liberals did whine a lot about content moderation on conservative flavored sites like parler and truth social. To the point that Amazon, apple, and Google booted them off their web hosting services last year.

Secondly if you want to read The NY Times you are free to read their opinions in print or follow them thru twitter. If you want to read the NY Post, good luck finding them on Twitter. They were booted from twitter for correctly reporting the hunter Biden laptop story.

If twitter is just entertainment then why was the fbi meeting with them to moderate content?

Your Canadian friend is right we do make big issues out of small things sometimes but this is not one of them. I think bottom line you agree with the politics of the situation here so you don’t see a problem in this case.

I think all media nowadays is 90% entertainment and maybe 10% news. Look at the overly complicated recipes that the NYTIMES always publishes. It’s mostly fluff.

As far as accessing Hunter BIDEN stories in the NYPOST, here you go. It’s not hard.

New York Post

Your source for breaking news, news about New York, sports, business, entertainment, opinion, real estate, culture, fashion, and more.

nypost.com

 

[LaryngoSpazz]

I think all media nowadays is 90% entertainment and maybe 10% news. Look at the overly complicated recipes that the NYTIMES always publishes. It’s mostly fluff.

As far as accessing Hunter BIDEN stories in the NYPOST, here you go. It’s not hard.

New York Post

Your source for breaking news, news about New York, sports, business, entertainment, opinion, real estate, culture, fashion, and more.

nypost.com

So just to be clear you think most news is just entertainment so therefore censorship is ok?

 

[agammaglobulin]

I think all media nowadays is 90% entertainment and maybe 10% news. Look at the overly complicated recipes that the NYTIMES always publishes. It’s mostly fluff.

As far as accessing Hunter BIDEN stories in the NYPOST, here you go. It’s not hard.

New York Post

Your source for breaking news, news about New York, sports, business, entertainment, opinion, real estate, culture, fashion, and more.

nypost.com

We are talking about treatment of that story in 2020. Not today. Today, even CBS and NYT acknowledge the story to be true, but in 2020 two weeks before presidential election it was “Russian Disinformation” and had to be cancelled. Those posting about it were deleted and shadow banned.

Similar to Twitter shadow banning and censoring posts by a Stanford MD/PHD professor expressing concerns over COVID lockdowns hurting childrens education and social upbringing. Considered Misinformation and banned/blocked in 2020, now in 2022 known to be true.

Opinion | The Twitter Blacklisting of Jay Bhattacharya

The social-media platform revealed that many had been censored and shadow-banned.

www.wsj.com

 

[nimbus]

So just to be clear you think most news is just entertainment so therefore censorship is ok?

AFAIK the NYPOST website worked just fine in 2020 and anyone who wanted to read the stories could read them then. There’s a difference between censorship and private organizations making editorial decisions and moderating content. I could post things that would get me immediately banned on SDN. But I could easily post it somewhere else. I don’t have a right to have my views amplified on any particular forum.

 

[vector2]

AFAIK the NYPOST website worked just fine in 2020 and anyone who wanted to read the stories could read them then. There’s a difference between censorship and private organizations making editorial decisions and moderating content. I could post things that would get me immediately banned on SDN. But I could easily post it somewhere else. I don’t have a right to have my views amplified on any particular forum.

Conservatives are unable to wrap their minds around the idea that they got de-amplified more not because they're conservative, but because, on average, conservatives engaged in much more misinformation spreading since the election or since the pandemic started.

Say Twitter has a misinformation policy. And say a German guy tweets 2+2=4 and an Italian guy tweets 2+2=5. And following these events the Italian guy gets banned. Essentially what conservatives are doing is saying the latter guy was banned just cause Twitter is biased against Italians. Notice not once do they bring up whether the people who got de-amplified were actually saying factual things or not.