Most active commenters
  • dools(3)
  • valval(3)

←back to thread

Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

(www.theguardian.com)
243 points Jimmc414 | 15 comments | 13 Nov 24 20:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.002s | source | bottom
Show context
seydor ◴[13 Nov 24 21:53 UTC] No.42130473[source]▶
Yann Lecun is also telling everyone on Twitter very loudly that he won't be posting on Twitter.

The Guardian in another article explains that they are annoyed because Musk used twitter to promote his preferred candidate.

The Guardian itself used their own platform to publicly endorse Harris.

This deja-vu of childish antics is just comical in 2024

replies(18): >>42130525 #>>42130571 #>>42130597 #>>42130616 #>>42130620 #>>42130694 #>>42130705 #>>42130752 #>>42130802 #>>42130828 #>>42130857 #>>42130892 #>>42130907 #>>42131498 #>>42131663 #>>42131841 #>>42132444 #>>42134987 #
1. dools ◴[13 Nov 24 22:12 UTC] No.42130694[source]▶
Musk claims he is trying to be an open and free speech town square. I don’t have an opinion on whether he did this or not but it is certainly the case that if he put his finger on the scales that goes against his claims.
replies(2): >>42130818 #>>42131214 #
2. briandear ◴[13 Nov 24 22:23 UTC] No.42130818[source]▶
Did X suppress support of the other side? The Hunter Biden laptop story is a prime example of the difference between X and Twitter. The suppression of Covid debate is another example.

On old Twitter you could call someone a Nazi and accuse them (falsely) of genocide. But if you “dead name” a celebrity, you’d get banned.

replies(3): >>42130883 #>>42131090 #>>42135035 #
3. 1986 ◴[13 Nov 24 22:29 UTC] No.42130883[source]▶
Yes, a user was banned for sharing the Vance dossier

https://www.fastcompany.com/91198871/why-x-suspended-journal...

4. dools ◴[13 Nov 24 22:50 UTC] No.42131090[source]▶
I'm not sure about the veracity of your claims of bias pre-Musk (I have heard of the NY Post story issue, as far as I'm aware they suppressed it on advice from law enforcement that it was foreign propaganda, which was later withdrawn and the block removed).

However in answer to this question:

> Did X suppress support of the other side?

If you have 2 options and you promote one artificially then that is the same as suppressing the other option, in either case you're making sure more people see one option than the other.

5. jslaby ◴[13 Nov 24 23:05 UTC] No.42131214[source]▶
I just created an account on X and the list that pops up to follow: Elon, Terrence Williams, Sebastian Gorka, Dinesh D'Souza, Rand Paul, Dan Bongino, Leo Terrell, Tom Fitton, Mark Levin, Tiffany Smiley, Breitbart News, Matt Gaetz... not a single "left leaning" account other than Joe Biden and maybe Neil Degrasse Tyson, but I chose sports and science as my interests. Open and free speech, right..
replies(1): >>42131493 #
6. valval ◴[13 Nov 24 23:44 UTC] No.42131493[source]▶
Since it’s the platform that takes freedom of speech the most seriously, it caters to people who are for freedom of speech.
replies(2): >>42131563 #>>42132106 #
7. defrost ◴[13 Nov 24 23:53 UTC] No.42131563{3}[source]▶
/s
8. grahamj ◴[14 Nov 24 01:12 UTC] No.42132106{3}[source]▶
Hey remember this?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41662702

Fun times

replies(3): >>42133397 #>>42135017 #>>42137053 #
9. dools ◴[14 Nov 24 05:33 UTC] No.42133397{4}[source]▶
I don't even know why they bother with that kind of research. It's obvious that Trump can just lie and all his supporters believe it because they have a propaganda arm that's perceived as "news". The Trump believers all think that "MSM" is lying to them but for some reason they think that Fox and NewsMax and Alex Jones aren't (when the exact opposite is true).

It's like the whole hush money thing. Turns out it just doesn't matter, they should have let Stormy Daniels say whatever she wants because Trump just has to go on stage and make stuff up and then Hannity will repeat it and it becomes right-wing canon.

replies(2): >>42136190 #>>42137080 #
10. rsynnott ◴[14 Nov 24 10:59 UTC] No.42135017{4}[source]▶
'Freedom of speech', in this context, should be read as 'stuff Musk likes'.
replies(1): >>42136133 #
11. rsynnott ◴[14 Nov 24 11:02 UTC] No.42135035[source]▶
I mean, new!Twitter went through a phase of banning people for merely uttering the dread word 'mastodon'. They also, briefly, hilariously, memory-holed the word 'Twitter' (any occurrence of the string 'twitter' on the mobile app would be replaced with 'X', leading to a rare 2020s outbreak the Medireview Problem: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/medireview). And various other deranged petty nonsense.
12. tim333 ◴[14 Nov 24 13:53 UTC] No.42136133{5}[source]▶
The above example was a case of their rules against doxing - publishing JD Vances address and phone number, which is applied pretty evenly to all doxing.
13. tim333 ◴[14 Nov 24 13:59 UTC] No.42136190{5}[source]▶
The Michael Moore Human Molotov Cocktail speech explains a lot https://youtu.be/TEHekdQSiXg
14. valval ◴[14 Nov 24 15:22 UTC] No.42137053{4}[source]▶
Oh yeah this thing that went against X rules?

https://x.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1839463404286746770

To be fair they could censor a million differing opinions and still be the free speech platform among competitors.

15. valval ◴[14 Nov 24 15:24 UTC] No.42137080{5}[source]▶
He’s going with the old classic: the opposite side is brainwashed and dumb!

Another home run.