←back to thread

707 points patd | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.685s | source
Show context
Traster ◴[] No.23322571[source]
I think this is going to be a discussion thread that is almost inevitably going to be a shitshow, but anyway:

There are people who advocate the idea that private companies should be compelled to distribute hate speech, dangerously factually incorrect information and harassment under the concept that free speech is should be applied universally rather than just to government. I don't agree, I think it's a vast over-reach and almost unachievable to have both perfect free speech on these platforms and actually run them as a viable business.

But let's lay that aside, those people who make the argument claim to be adhering to an even stronger dedication to free speech. Surely, it's clear here that having the actual head of the US government threatening to shut down private companies for how they choose to manage their platforms is a far more disturbing and direct threat against free speech even in the narrowest sense.

replies(42): >>23322601 #>>23322660 #>>23322889 #>>23322983 #>>23323095 #>>23323271 #>>23325355 #>>23327443 #>>23327459 #>>23327625 #>>23327899 #>>23327986 #>>23328982 #>>23329094 #>>23329143 #>>23329230 #>>23329237 #>>23329375 #>>23329616 #>>23329658 #>>23329911 #>>23330257 #>>23330267 #>>23330422 #>>23330438 #>>23330441 #>>23331115 #>>23331430 #>>23331436 #>>23331462 #>>23331469 #>>23331944 #>>23332090 #>>23332213 #>>23332505 #>>23332858 #>>23332905 #>>23332934 #>>23332983 #>>23333360 #>>23341099 #>>23346876 #
yibg ◴[] No.23330438[source]
Also, in this case no one is being censored. It's not like the president isn't allowed to post and is having his "freedom of speech" taken away. This is more like his speech is being responded to, and he doesn't like that others can challenge what he's saying. The very antithesis of free speech.
replies(1): >>23330737 #
isoskeles ◴[] No.23330737[source]
Applied unequally. Reminds me of these old fact checks during the election:

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/09/trump-pence-acid-wash-fact...

> Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump falsely claimed Clinton “acid washed” 33,000 personal emails to delete them, calling it “an expensive process.” The FBI said Clinton’s tech team used BleachBit, which is a free software program. It does not use chemicals.

These sorts of "fact checks" are blatant horse shit that always go in one direction. Some "challenge", the very antithesis of any sort of good faith discussion on the facts.

replies(3): >>23330846 #>>23332034 #>>23332460 #
hedora ◴[] No.23332460[source]
Your argument seems to be that substandard fact checkers exist, so all fact checkers are substandard. I don’t see how it follows. In this case, it’s extremely well documented (and there is bipartisan agreement) that mail in ballots are not a substantial source of fraud.

States that allow no excuse mail in ballots are evenly split between red and blue.

Do you have a specific critique of statements Twitter made in this case?

replies(1): >>23334128 #
1. isoskeles ◴[] No.23334128[source]
Let's not play coy with this false discussion about mail-in ballots. We both know that's not what this is about.

Twitter does not fact-check Democrats. The end.

replies(2): >>23334308 #>>23334440 #
2. joshuamorton ◴[] No.23334440[source]
Twitter also doesn't fact check Republicans. It fact checks exactly one person, known for spreading misinformation.
3. isoskeles ◴[] No.23334489[source]
I don't use Twitter, so I couldn't point out a specific tweet. But offhand, let's say any tweet accusing the Trump campaign of collusion with Russia. I'm sure there are hundreds.