ewsieg Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 1 hour 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'm focusing on Twitter because it's the big dog in the social media world when we're talking about sharing news and in many cases publishing news. But it's not held up to a higher standard than Fox News, or any other publisher, in fact it has a much lower standard. IMO, it was an issue when it resulted in a small group of private citizens deciding what would be the days talking points. Now with Elon, it's no longer an issue for a large constituency of the population, yet for some reason the other half now have some complaints about it. The correct view of it is that it was a problem before, and it's a problem now. And if the current owner of it truly believes it should be the town square, it should some government oversight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 3 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I'm focusing on Twitter because it's the big dog in the social media world when we're talking about sharing news and in many cases publishing news. But it's not held up to a higher standard than Fox News, or any other publisher, in fact it has a much lower standard. IMO, it was an issue when it resulted in a small group of private citizens deciding what would be the days talking points. Now with Elon, it's no longer an issue for a large constituency of the population, yet for some reason the other half now have some complaints about it. The correct view of it is that it was a problem before, and it's a problem now. And if the current owner of it truly believes it should be the town square, it should some government oversight. I didn't see a big problem with Twitter pre Musk and I don't see one now. Twitter has never come close to the problem that Fox News and many news sites are. It only became a problem because they banned king Donald and now it must be destroyed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 2 hours ago, pfife said: Aren't you arguing that they were the opposite ot unfettered, they were being heavily influenced by the govt? I don't think so, because 1) they had the power not to be influenced by the govt and 2) they chose which government members they'd listen to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 1 hour ago, pfife said: Hawley to his credit is looking at that. He's working on a bill that says you can't gave a social media account under age 16. Definitely, one of the rare times when he's actually being useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) 14 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I'm focusing on Twitter because it's the big dog in the social media world when we're talking about sharing news and in many cases publishing news. But it's not held up to a higher standard than Fox News, or any other publisher, in fact it has a much lower standard. On the other hand, Fox News is far more influential and, as a product, is used by far more Americans than Twitter is. Edited February 9, 2023 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 9 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I don't think so, because 1) they had the power not to be influenced by the govt and 2) they chose which government members they'd listen to. Not to pivot back to cable news or anything, but don't your complaints perfectly describe the cable news media space to a T? Donald Trump literally had a direct line to hosts at Fox News when he was President, but for some reason that doesn't seem to be an issue in your view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 My issue with the Twitter files thing is that there apparently was a database because Republicans kept complaining wanting Tweets taken down but that was never mentioned in the Twitter files. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 9 minutes ago, mtutiger said: On the other hand, Fox News is far more influential and, as a product, is used by far more Americans than Twitter is. Whatever you're smoking, please just don't drive. Fox news definitely has it's target audience and is absolutely influential to them, but do their primetime folks even get 2 million viewers anymore? Yet a person with 20 followers can put out some random tweet that manages to go viral and it can control a news cycle for a day. And on days that doesn't happen, it's the first place journalist go to push folks to their individual sites. Twitter is far more influential in determining what our news is on a day to day basis than any one single form of media ever. 1 minute ago, mtutiger said: Not to pivot back to cable news or anything, but don't your complaints perfectly describe the cable news media space to a T? Donald Trump literally had a direct line to hosts at Fox News when he was President, but for some reason that doesn't seem to be an issue in your view. I don't remember ever saying I didn't have an issue with that. Overall I think this is an unfair argument. You're over hear arguing with me over Twitter, I don't see you condemning political corruption, or black men dying at the hands of policing. Why don't you care about those? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: My issue with the Twitter files thing is that there apparently was a database because Republicans kept complaining wanting Tweets taken down but that was never mentioned in the Twitter files. Yup, which all kinda confirms that it isnt some righteous stand in favor of free speech. I've seen some pretty interesting arguments in favor of a more absolutist free speech environment on these platforms, but it's generally not coming from anyone in government or from the current owner of Twitter or his employees. Edited February 9, 2023 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 I seriously doubt it will be difficult to ban those under 16 from Twitter. We do need to manage the exploitation of our young by CCP entities (e.g., TIk Tok). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 13 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: My issue with the Twitter files thing is that there apparently was a database because Republicans kept complaining wanting Tweets taken down but that was never mentioned in the Twitter files. Except it was mentioned, in the very first Twitter files. In fact I remember on this very site it was specifically called out to show government corruption against Trump because he was the president at the time, whereas Biden was just a private citizen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 4 minutes ago, ewsieg said: Whatever you're smoking, please just don't drive. Fox news definitely has it's target audience and is absolutely influential to them, but do their primetime folks even get 2 million viewers anymore? Far higher, in fact. The Five, which is early evening, averaged 3.3 million a night in 2022. When you consider many viewers tune in at different times, significantlu more than 2 million viewers per night are watching that channel. 5 minutes ago, ewsieg said: Yet a person with 20 followers can put out some random tweet that manages to go viral and it can control a news cycle for a day. And on days that doesn't happen, it's the first place journalist go to push folks to their individual sites. Twitter is far more influential in determining what our news is on a day to day basis than any one single form of media ever. I would suggest that just because something goes viral online doesn't mean that it ultimately filters down into the consciousness of most Americans. Hence the term "too online"... even among platforms, Facebook, often seen as a declining medium, likely has a greater impact than Facebook does given that it has *way* more users. 8 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I don't remember ever saying I didn't have an issue with that. Well, I was curious to know given how similarly your complaints apply to the cable news medium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 7 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Yup, which all kinda confirms that it isnt some righteous stand in favor of free speech. I've seen some pretty interesting arguments in favor of a more absolutist free speech environment on these platforms, but it's generally not coming from anyone on government or from the current owner of Twitter or his employees. Which again, is almost like why maybe our government could provide some oversight on it.....IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 31 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I don't think so, because 1) they had the power not to be influenced by the govt and 2) they chose which government members they'd listen to. Well, when one side is cheering on a coup attempt and later pushing misinformation thst gets people killed, the issue is that side leaving the reservation not the people doing the moderating. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) 5 minutes ago, ewsieg said: Except it was mentioned, in the very first Twitter files. In fact I remember on this very site it was specifically called out to show government corruption against Trump because he was the president at the time, whereas Biden was just a private citizen. It was mentioned in passing but somehow didn't warrant the Hunter Biden, 80-tweet Twitter file treatment. Hence how this whole discussion started in the first place.... Taibbi isn't an unbiased truth teller, he has a POV that he's advancing through his work. And he's a hypocrite. Edited February 9, 2023 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 4 minutes ago, ewsieg said: Which again, is almost like why maybe our government could provide some oversight on it.....IMO. You really think government oversight would lead to a more absolutist free speech environment on these platforms? With this Congress??? 😆 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 9 minutes ago, ewsieg said: Which again, is almost like why maybe our government could provide some oversight on it.....IMO. THAT would violate the first amendment. People don't understand that fact. Ad revenues and the free market regulate it. These rules are in place because these platforms don't want their sites to be liable to dark stuff and want to be able to sell ads. Tough to tell Chevy to pay to advertise on their site if they are going to be wedged between nazi tweets. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 Twitter is a private company that can make it's own decisions and be judged in the marketplace of ideas as either a useful place to go or not. The government shouldn't regulate or have any oversight over them in the same sense they shouldn't have had oversight over the magazine rack at the checkout line, between the Sports Illustrateds, Glamours, Cosmos, or National Enquirers. A bookstore can decide what to stock and sell. If they want the nudie mags in with the others, so be it. That's between them and their customers. If they don't want to stock them or guns and ammo or bibles or gay magazines... so be it. Same with Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. No crime was committed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 50 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I'm focusing on Twitter because it's the big dog in the social media world when we're talking about sharing news and in many cases publishing news. But it's not held up to a higher standard than Fox News, or any other publisher, in fact it has a much lower standard. IMO, it was an issue when it resulted in a small group of private citizens deciding what would be the days talking points. Now with Elon, it's no longer an issue for a large constituency of the population, yet for some reason the other half now have some complaints about it. The correct view of it is that it was a problem before, and it's a problem now. And if the current owner of it truly believes it should be the town square, it should some government oversight. Twitter isn't the big dog in news distribution among social media. It's at best in 3rd place but more realistically 4th place. Your conflating of followers with users (and humans) is woefully uninformed. Small groups of private citizens decide talking points all the time. Furthermore, hunters lap and laptop still remained a talking point regardless of what twitter did, because a small private (pun intended) group of citizens at news Corp and and rudi made it a talking point. Your selective outrage is hilarious. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben9753 Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 He’s a RINO cuck 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 4 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: Mitt has given his last F with the extremists in the GOP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 58 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I don't think so, because 1) they had the power not to be influenced by the govt and 2) they chose which government members they'd listen to. Which government officials did they listen to and which government officials did they not listen to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted February 9, 2023 Share Posted February 9, 2023 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Edman85 said: THAT would violate the first amendment. People don't understand that fact. Ad revenues and the free market regulate it. These rules are in place because these platforms don't want their sites to be liable to dark stuff and want to be able to sell ads. Tough to tell Chevy to pay to advertise on their site if they are going to be wedged between nazi tweets. It should be noted that Tom Cotton seemingly threatened GM over pulling advertising on Twitter a few months ago. Which raises questions about why a self-described conservative would be advocating using the power of the state to compel a business to do business with another business. Edited February 9, 2023 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.