(twitter.com)

1061 points danso | 1 comments | 29 May 20 07:24 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source

Show context

lykahb ◴[29 May 20 15:34 UTC] No.23351178[source]▶

The neutral companies, such as utilities, online hosting or financial providers serve nearly everyone with little objections - they defer to the law rather than any internal policies. The more selective companies such as newspapers and TV channels are expected to restrict who can get published.

By representing itself both as an open platform and as a company with progressive values, Twitter has put itself into an awkward in-between spot and is bound to create such controversies.

replies(7): >>23351236 #>>23351412 #>>23351773 #>>23351797 #>>23352829 #>>23355936 #>>23358514 #

QuercusMax ◴[29 May 20 15:50 UTC] No.23351412[source]▶

>>23351178 #

Fact-checking obvious lies is a "progressive value"? Wow, that really shows how bad things have gotten.

replies(5): >>23351687 #>>23351805 #>>23352804 #>>23352928 #>>23356560 #

1. aeternum ◴[29 May 20 22:56 UTC] No.23356560[source]▶

>>23351412 #

Very few statements are entirely true or entirely false. So let's not pretend like "fact-checking" is an ideal.

Whoever is doing the "fact-checking" wields great power that can very easily be abused or subverted, similar to the ministry of truth in 1984. This is what people are concerned about.

And while that is clearly an extreme, even a small bias in the fact-check is greatly amplified given the number of users on Twitter/Facebook/etc.

↑

Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”