Jump to content

Cleanup in Aisle Lunatic (h/t romad1)


chasfh

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, ewsieg said:

I read nearly all of the Twitter Files, it absolutely pointed out attempts by members of both parties, but it also pointed out the difference in which ones they chose to listen to.  Twitter employee's weren't big into 'both sidsin', so i'm not surprised nearly no one here had any issues with civilians in a private company with such a monopoly on spreading news within this nation picking and choosing what folks see.

Twitter is nowhere near a monopoly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mtutiger said:

They just had one today where people had to schedule tweets in order to actually send them... probably testing some new change.

For a while they were defaulting to a "For You" tab over the time-line which was sharing content I largely don't care about, despite likely being based on an algorithm.

Either way, I've noticed a difference. Ymmv

I always know I'm on the for you tab because I'll see an MTG tweet.   So I'm liberal AF and their algorithm still sends me right wing bile.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

So was Trump embarrassing Pelosi publicly by failing to shake her outstretched hand when he handed her the speech before the address.

Trump is childish and an embarrassment by default.  Responding to his game in kind is always a bad idea.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twitter is a private company.     They can ban anything they want.  They can ban people for being Packers fans if they wanted (that would be awesome). Then you can turn around and leave Twitter.   I was never active in it, but if I was, I would have left as soon as Elon Mush started his bullshit.      Anyone can start their own version of Twitter.    Free Market.  Funny how they love the Free Market when it favors them but not other times.  

I don't go to Chick-Fil-A, and not because it's totally overrated, but because I don't like their support of homophobic organizations.   My problem with them is therefore solved on my end. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ewsieg said:

While I never tweet and rarely retweet, I use it daily.  Seems like once a year I need to 'clean it up' in order to ensure I'm seeing what I want.  Just because you've seen some stuff you would prefer to have seen blocked, doesn't mean they didn't shadow ban in the past.  

Sure, they banned stuff.  The most visable banning was Trump and that was the right move because he is a very influential person who was inspiring violence.  My point is that there are plenty of opportunities for people to express far right and far left ideas on Twitter.  There are a lot worse media sites (social media and otherwise) that are way more biased.  I don't see what the big deal is.  Even now that it's more right wing biased, it's not a big deal since I can still control my user experience pretty well.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tiger337 said:

Trump is childish and an embarrassment by default.  Responding to his game in kind is always a bad idea.  

So all the President of the United States of America has to do to get a pass for his behavior is be childish and petulant on a regular basis, but the Speaker of the House has a bad moment and she gets good and raked for that? How convenient for the man.

I know you're not saying Trump should be excused for his childish behavior, but my point is that he does get regularly excused for his childish behavior. I agree Pelosi should take criticism for the tearing up of the speech, but the criticism for that single incident is also generally out of proportion versus that of Trump's pathological behavior. I think it's the fire hose effect: because Trump displays a fire hose of childish behavior, it's hard to pick out just one outrageous incident as an example, whereas Nancy does something once, and everybody remembers and crushes her for that. So I think if someone going to post that criticism of Nancy, regardless of how justified it is, it's fair to reply with an incident of Trump's, one directly related to hers.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Trump is childish and an embarrassment by default.  Responding to his game in kind is always a bad idea.  

Trump refusing to go to Biden's inauguration was only the fifth time in American history and the first once since Andrew Johnson refused to attend U.S. Grant's.  Johnson was a childish, scandal-ridden, insufferable prick, just like Trump.  It perfectly encapsulated who he is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

So all the President of the United States of America has to do to get a pass for his behavior is be childish and petulant on a regular basis, but the Speaker of the House has a bad moment and she gets good and raked for that? How convenient for the man.

I know you're not saying Trump should be excused for his childish behavior, but my point is that he does get regularly excused for his childish behavior. I agree Pelosi should take criticism for the tearing up of the speech, but the criticism for that single incident is also generally out of proportion versus that of Trump's pathological behavior. I think it's the fire hose effect: because Trump displays a fire hose of childish behavior, it's hard to pick out just one outrageous incident as an example, whereas Nancy does something once, and everybody remembers and crushes her for that. So I think if someone going to post that criticism of Nancy, regardless of how justified it is, it's fair to reply with an incident of Trump's, one directly related to hers.

LOL, I don't give Trump a pass for his behavior.  He is a huge disgrace in every way.  If he was not born into wealth, he would have spent his life going in and out of prison and/or mental health treatment.  Pelosi knows better and should not have dragged herself down to his level.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Screwball said:

Elmo already did look into it, and made public a treasure trove of internal Twitter documents, which was disseminated via Twitter by 5 or 6 different people. They came out in pieces, each dealing with many hot button topics of the day we have went through over the years.

I suppose what one reads out of them depends on their tribal outlook of the world, but it's some really wild shit.

If you have read the 600 plus Tweets and the countless articles about what they exposed, and don't think there is anything wrong, you have your head planted firmly up your ass.

There was a hearing in congress today along these lines, so I'm sure the fix is in. Pun intended.

Is there a media site (social media or otherwise) which doesn't ban stuff or ignore stuff or try to please politicians?   I don't get the outrage.  Even now that Twitter is more right biased I don't think it's a big deal.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, chasfh said:

So all the President of the United States of America has to do to get a pass for his behavior is be childish and petulant on a regular basis, but the Speaker of the House has a bad moment and she gets good and raked for that? How convenient for the man.

I know you're not saying Trump should be excused for his childish behavior, but my point is that he does get regularly excused for his childish behavior. I agree Pelosi should take criticism for the tearing up of the speech, but the criticism for that single incident is also generally out of proportion versus that of Trump's pathological behavior. I think it's the fire hose effect: because Trump displays a fire hose of childish behavior, it's hard to pick out just one outrageous incident as an example, whereas Nancy does something once, and everybody remembers and crushes her for that. So I think if someone going to post that criticism of Nancy, regardless of how justified it is, it's fair to reply with an incident of Trump's, one directly related to hers.

I'm not here to argue your points above, with which I agree, but to note that I really don't get how people lump Pelosi's fully decorous and completely symbolic act, into the same pot with things that are often crude, essentially aggressive and/or assaultive/disruptive in nature.

Edited by gehringer_2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Sure, they banned stuff.  The most visable banning was Trump and that was the right move because he is a very influential person who was inspiring violence.  

You could easily argue, given the frequency with which he violated Twitter's TOS, that he could have been banned much earlier than he actually was.

They kinda waited until they hadn't much choice, right after he helped to incite a mob to storm the Capitol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's definitely a strange world where one of the lone 'conservatives' on this site is the one pointing out issues with unfettered corporations, such as Twitter with the power to determine the news as the nations town square and the response from the liberals is that we should celebrate the free market.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I'm not here to argue your points above, with which I agree, but to note that I really don't get how people lump Pelosi's fully decorous and completely symbolic act, into the same pot with things that are often crude, essentially aggressive and/or assaultive/disruptive in nature.

Bothsidesism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

It's definitely a strange world where one of the lone 'conservatives' on this site is the one pointing out issues with unfettered corporations, such as Twitter with the power to determine the news as the nations town square and the response from the liberals is that we should celebrate the free market.

 

 

Aren't you arguing that they were the opposite ot unfettered, they were being heavily influenced by the govt?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

It's definitely a strange world where one of the lone 'conservatives' on this site is the one pointing out issues with unfettered corporations, such as Twitter with the power to determine the news as the nations town square and the response from the liberals is that we should celebrate the free market.

All it tells me is that conservative dedication to free market principles was largely always conditional on a society where the free market outcome tended in their favor.

As society has evolved and as social norms have changed, so has the dedication to those principles for many who hang that label on themselves. 

Edited by mtutiger
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

LOL, I don't give Trump a pass for his behavior.  He is a huge disgrace in every way.  If he was not born into wealth, he would have spent his life going in and out of prison and/or mental health treatment.  Pelosi knows better and should not have dragged herself down to his level.  

I don't think you give Trump a pass. But I do think that Chas is correct in saying that there's an asymmetry in expectations between Trump and Democratic politicians in that people expect better from the latter and, as a result, tend to be a lot harsher over stuff that sort of pales in comparison to things that Trump would do.

It's something that's been discussed here a lot... on one hand, I do expect better from someone like Pelosi or Biden than I would from Trump for obvious reasons. On the other hand, Trump needs to be held to the same expectations as Pelosi, Biden and his predecessors.... and the firehose effect that Chas speaks of makes it very difficult to do that and, as a result, makes it seem like Trump is held to lower expectations.

Edited by mtutiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mtutiger said:

I don't think you give Trump a pass. But I do think that Chas is correct in saying that there's an asymmetry in expectations between Trump and Democratic politicians in that people expect better from the latter and, as a result, tend to be a lot harsher over stuff that sort of pales in comparison to things that Trump would do.

It's something that's been discussed here a lot... on one hand, I do expect better from someone like Pelosi or Biden than I would from Trump for obvious reasons. On the other hand, Trump needs to be held to the same expectations as Pelosi, Biden and his predecessors.... and the firehose effect that Chas speaks of makes it very difficult to do that and, as a result, makes it seem like Trump is held to lower expectations.

I agree with this point.  I am glad that most of us here refuse to be gaslighted and continue to not to give Trump a pass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

It's definitely a strange world where one of the lone 'conservatives' on this site is the one pointing out issues with unfettered corporations, such as Twitter with the power to determine the news as the nations town square and the response from the liberals is that we should celebrate the free market.

 

 

I don't know if I'm considered a liberal or not (:classic_wink:) but I think we need to shift our whole understanding about media regulation from the free speech paradigm to the environmental pollution paradigm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

I don't know if I'm considered a liberal or not (:classic_wink:) but I think we need to shift our whole understanding about media regulation from the free speech paradigm to the environmental pollution paradigm.

I don't know.  I am of the belief that free speech protects you from arrest or governmental punishment. It doesn't protect you from backlash you might get from people and private companies who are merely expressing their own free speech in not wanting to be involved with you.      Media companies/networks never used to profit off the news, in fact it often was a profit loss, but they considered it important.  Now they are another wing of the entertainment division, and an entertainment company can sell whatever they want to you.  You now have thousands of options to get news or entertainment and if a media/"news" division is saying things you don't like,  you can turn elsewhere. 

But Free Speech is not and never has been absolute.   Using speech to knowingly plan a crime is not covered.   Charles Manson thought free speech would protect him from the murders he ordered.   He told his people what to do and then left.    Free speech isn't covered when a kid makes a bomb threat or shooting threat to a school because he used that free speech to commit the crime of false reporting  (we've had a huge wave of this in the last week in Michigan, and it may be coming from the same person or group).   There are limits to everything, it's common sense.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

It's definitely a strange world where one of the lone 'conservatives' on this site is the one pointing out issues with unfettered corporations, such as Twitter with the power to determine the news as the nations town square and the response from the liberals is that we should celebrate the free market.

 

 

I think most large corporations are dishonest and corrupt.  That's how they get to be big corporations!  I am questioning why you are singling out Twitter.  Much like the Trump/Pelosi/Greene discussion, why is Twitter being held to a higher standard than Fox News?     

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I think most large corporations are dishonest and corrupt.  That's how they get to be big corporations!  I am questioning why you are singling out Twitter.  Much like the Trump/Pelosi/Greene discussion, why is Twitter being held to a higher standard than Fox News?     

I worked for a radio station owned by Disney.    They are evil. Pure evil.    South Park's depiction of "Mr. Mouse" is far closer to the truth than anyone would like to admit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One big problem I have with the discourse on social media in general is how it is sort of dominated with this abstract discussion about political bias when there are much more tangible reasons for oversight.... the kinds of things that are transmitted toward youth and the impacts that it has, for instance.

I just don't see a lot of concern for that coming from a lot of conservatives in Congress.... it all just seems to be an combined exercise in "working the refs" and messaging to the base that ultimately seems self serving as opposed to serving any sort of greater good.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

Trump is childish and an embarrassment by default.  Responding to his game in kind is always a bad idea.  

I was going to quote your earlier comment on Pelosi, and state that Trump's speech itself was also childish...

But I think you've already covered that here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      284
    • Most Online
      625

    Newest Member
    Hinchman11
    Joined
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...