Elon Musk Becomes Twitter’s Largest Shareholder…

[KLB]

Should be added to this. "Twitter has interfered in elections" "At the behest of the DNC and the Biden campaign"

I don't see that this really qualifies as "election interference". They controlled information on a platform. They did not stop people from voting. Is running an ad with false or misleading information "election interference"?

 

[wtburnette]

I don't see that this really qualifies as "election interference". They controlled information on a platform. They did not stop people from voting. Is running an ad with false or misleading information "election interference"?

Election interference due to the narrative that was crafted, thanks to the information being suppressed on social media, that it was misinformation, or false. Polls were taken that indicated that tons of people who voted for Biden wouldn't have if they have known about the Hunter Biden laptop information, or didn't think that it was false.

May not have been only Twitter's fault, but they were part of a bigger whole in that debacle.

 

[KLB]

Election interference due to the narrative that was crafted, thanks to the information being suppressed on social media, that it was misinformation, or false. Polls were taken that indicated that tons of people who voted for Biden wouldn't have if they have known about the Hunter Biden laptop information, or didn't think that it was false.

May not have been only Twitter's fault, but they were part of a bigger whole in that debacle.

I understand election interference as specifically breaking a law. Is it being used in some other context here? Because it sure feels like that is the insinuation.

 

[wtburnette]

I understand election interference as specifically breaking a law. Is it being used in some other context here? Because it sure feels like that is the insinuation.

Sure seems unlawful to suppress information that would swing an election, but what do I know...

 

[jamil]

GPIA7, is that you?

He’s got a point. For all the sentiment about twitter, a lot of INGO discussion are topics brought here from Twitter. If there’s a “national conversation” it’s mostly on Twitter.

 

[foszoe]

Because many of us have better things to do than stare at our phones? Heck, many of us use our phones predominantly as phones and realize that the are just a glorified pocket security leak

If you can't tell who the patsy is in deal, it's probably you

Let's call for the Mods to post user online time!

Twitter also works on a computer.

 

[jamil]

Yeah, the part about how Biden is innocent and Clinton did nothing wrong is pure delusion if they believe it in any other way than cynically

In another part of the document drop an email from a Democrat congress critter to Vajaya Gadde, the congress woman said that the Hunter Biden emails were “innocuous”. And that the conservatives were able to make it about free speech.

Innocuous? Try flipping the script. If this happened to any conservative politico see how fast that gets flipped from innocuous to harmful.

 

[foszoe]

He’s got a point. For all the sentiment about twitter, a lot of INGO discussion are topics brought here from Twitter. If there’s a “national conversation” it’s mostly on Twitter.

You can trace most stuff here to a handful of sources. Few years back it was drudgereport.com but it's been moving a bit more since 2016 when drudgereport.com went against Trump.

 

[Ingomike]

I understand election interference as specifically breaking a law. Is it being used in some other context here? Because it sure feels like that is the insinuation.

Sure seems unlawful to suppress information that would swing an election, but what do I know...

The part that disturbs me most is the alphabet agencies involvement in the suppression of information. That candidates or surrogates ask media not to publish stories seems common and I cannot see where that is against the law.

BUT, I cannot believe it is legal for supposedly non political government agency to be involved in telling a private company what to do or not do, particularly to advantage one candidate over another. I believe the federal code makes election interference by the agencies illegal. That is what heads should roll over...

 

[jamil]

If you ache so much to be right on the internet amongst strangers, I'll let you call it news.

Have you heard from the Kraken lately?

News is just new information that has a wide importance attached. Doesn’t matter were we get it from. And not everyone attaches the same importance to the new information.

 

[jamil]

You can trace most stuff here to a handful of sources. Few years back it was drudgereport.com but it's been moving a bit more since 2016 when drudgereport.com went against Trump.

Drudge is dead. Ling live Drudge.

Things have diversified a lot since then. Newsmax. Trunews. GWP. Epoch Times. Those are the outlets of trust now for the right.

Twitter is only a source of news when someone tweets something newsworthy. It often is a pointer to news stories where you learn about a story’s existence on Twitter, but you have to go to that other source to see it.

 

[jamil]

I don't see that this really qualifies as "election interference". They controlled information on a platform. They did not stop people from voting. Is running an ad with false or misleading information "election interference"?

The control of information was primarily in one direction. It interfered by preventing information damaging to one candidate. I haven’t vetted the stories about many Biden voters claiming they would not have voted for him if they’d known the story was real. They were told, with Twitter’s help, that the story was false.

That’s election interference.

 

[foszoe]

Drudge is dead. Ling live Drudge.

Things have diversified a lot since then. Newsmax. Trunews. GWP. Epoch Times. Those are the outlets of trust now for the right.

Twitter is only a source of news when someone tweets something newsworthy. It often is a pointer to news stories where you learn about a story’s existence on Twitter, but you have to go to that other source to see it.

Twitter and Trump crushed Drudge.

Even those that say they don't have Twitter are missing out. Saves time checking your favorite sources one at a time.

 

[jamil]

I understand election interference as specifically breaking a law. Is it being used in some other context here? Because it sure feels like that is the insinuation.

Part of the twitter information drop included conversions between democrats and Twitter executives to remove damaging tweets to democrats. Is that illegal? I think it should be. But it’s fair to call it election interference even if colluding with social media to help one party over another isn’t illegal.

 

[Ingomike]

Drudge is dead. Ling live Drudge.

Things have diversified a lot since then. Newsmax. Trunews. GWP. Epoch Times. Those are the outlets that publish news from the right.

FIFY

Drudge rarely did news, just mostly linked others reports after he made a name for himself breaking the Kemp VP selection and later the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal. Actually found GWP on Drudge.

If twitter is questioned as a source of news so would Drudge…

 

[jamil]

Twitter and Trump crushed Drudge.

Even those that say they don't have Twitter are missing out. Saves time checking your favorite sources one at a time.

I think I tended to stay away from the twitter discussion threads because they were usually involving toxic ideologically possessed blue checks. The discussions seem less toxic now. At least the ones that make it to my feed.

 

[jamil]

FIFY

Drudge rarely did news, just mostly linked others reports after he made a name for himself breaking the Kemp VP selection and later the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal. Actually found GWP on Drudge.

If twitter is questioned as a source of news so would Drudge…

Mo, it’s like I said about twitter. It’s a pointer to news. Drudge was a pointer to news. Twitter is a better drudge.

 

[Ingomike]

Mo, it’s like I said about twitter. It’s a pointer to news. Drudge was a pointer to news. Twitter is a better drudge.

They are kinda the same only different.

Can we agree that a fair analogy is that twitter is equal to TV or maybe a steaming network? Lots of channels, some are news? The increases in twitter character counts has allowed even more information to be disseminated via tweets, which as you noted, include links to more information…

 

[foszoe]

They are kinda the same only different.

Can we agree that a fair analogy is that twitter is equal to TV or maybe a steaming network? Lots of channels, some are news? The increases in twitter character counts has allowed even more information to be disseminated via tweets, which as you noted, include links to more information…

No. Drudge and Twitter function as aggregates.

Difference to me is you have more control in Twitter over content presented and its more RT.

 

[jamil]

They are kinda the same only different.

Can we agree that a fair analogy is that twitter is equal to TV or maybe a steaming network? Lots of channels, some are news? The increases in twitter character counts has allowed even more information to be disseminated via tweets, which as you noted, include links to more information…

I don’t think twitter can be analogous to any broadcast medium, like TV or streaming networks. It’s more like a party line telephone system only world scope instead of local. Everyone can listen to any conversation. In that way, it’s not like Drudge either. Drudge was a news aggregator. They found stories which could be spun by changing the headlines to have a more right wing slant.

Twitter is microblogging where everyone can tweet what they want. It’s only a news aggregator in that peoole can customize what goes into their feed.

Until executives learned they could exploit it. And that’s pretty much what we’re talking about now.