|
|
Leaked draft details Trump plan against tech companies
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status:
Offline
|
|
A draft of Trump's impending executive order going after the large tech companies (brought about following Twitter's addition of a fact-check link to his posts, and his ensuing meltdown) has been leaked online (pdf).
Ars Technica has an overview.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
To have the power to lie, without anyone pointing it out. And if someone does point out the lie, the liar the reporter must be slapped down.
Because only the King can always be right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Offline
|
|
All the people screaming tyranny over being asked to wear a mask are perfectly ok with government stifling a) the free market, b) non-trump free speech, c) journalism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Apparently, the only option is to outright delete the offending tweets — which is allowed by the draft.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status:
Offline
|
|
Technically, Twitter could simply ban Trump for violating their TOS. They could have done it years ago. That’s the nuclear option, of course, and god knows what horrors he would unleash on the world over that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status:
Offline
|
|
This is bad on so many levels. Of course this non-sensical Executive Order that makes First Amendment claims is more for show than anything else. But now Twitter's indecisiveness on Trump comes home to roost, too. As Thorzdad correctly pointed out, Trump has violated Twitters terms of service many, many times, and Twitter hasn't done anything. The cynics may even say that Trump is a huge boon to Twitter, because it drives the outrage machine in overdrive.
Twitter's actions in this regard are not based on consistent and coherent principles, which not only weakens their case, but makes it harder for them to decide what to do. Clearly, they seem intimidated by some conservatives playing the victim because of purported discrimination on social platforms. (All the while President Trump is probably the most influential Twitter user in the world.) Also on a business end, banning Trump and a lot of other outrage-inducing Twitter users would cost Twitter money and influence. Their indecisiveness in no way justifies the Executive Order, though.
|
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
So beautiful. Twitter has just put a notice on a Trump tweet for glorifying violence.
They didn't take it down due to public interest, but they blocked likes and replies.
Why did it take so long for them to finally start doing the obvious and necessary?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/29/t...ent-trump.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Offline
|
|
The official White House account then reposted the tweet that had been flagged in a move meant to defy the company. Twitter responded by adding the same notice on the White House account.
The @potus account is a matter of public record and cannot be deleted right? what about @whitehouse?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Twitter is a private platform and gets to delete whatever they want. There's a very good reason everyone on the presidential staff (back when they were professionals, before they all got fired) went livid about him using Twitter for "official" policy announcements — apart from the utter insanity of not vetting his announcements with any of the staff, I mean. And the utter insanity of all the stuff he tweets that isn't actual policy.
In any case, I'm fine with them not deleting the "official" tweets. In fact, they really need to be archived for posterity.
But flagging them for violating posting rules and blocking likes, retweets, and replies, is the perfect move IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
(
Last edited by el chupacabra; Jan 5, 2024 at 03:08 AM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
I wish we could get a Twitter that would just adhere to their own rules and ban accounts that consistently violate them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by el chupacabra
I wish we could get a president who would just ban twitter. It’s a threat to national security. It’s making people dumber - more lord of the flies like.
Republicans want people dumber. Thats how they stay relevant.
|
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|