Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Twitter

Old 27th Apr 2022, 02:18
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The No Transgression Zone
Posts: 2,471
I'm no constitutional lawyer but I do believe that private businesses do not have to follow the first Ammendment or any of the Ammendments in the bill of rights AFAIK
Pugilistic Animus is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 02:24
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunnydale
Posts: 214
If the right are the bastion of free speech. Why are they banning everything. Don’t say gay? Banning maths books. I do find it funny that the right actually do what they accuse the left of doing.
back to Boeing is online now  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 02:33
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by Sam Ting Wong View Post
I find the spending of 44 B on "free speech" in the West decadent, dishonest, vain and self-centered.

As we speak 120 million Russians believe their country needs to defend national interests in a "special operation". 120 million brainwashed people dehumanized by a ruthless regime. Same thing in China ( one of the biggest markets for Tesla..) These countries are basically zombie nations, void of independent citizens. Orchestrated Nationalism is on the rise because of manipulative state media and extreme censorship. Billions of people are affected.

At the same time some believe in the West "you can't say your opinion anymore" etc. Or take the gender pronoun and free speech discussion by Jordan Peterson. Or the rants of Tucker Carlson. These individuals all claim there is no free speech, but at the same time attract a huge amount of listeners and viewers, literally millions. Absurd and self-contradicting. After listening to them you could think we are all living in the Soviet Union. It is is a dramatic and hysteric exaggeration to believe there is no free speech in the West. Nowhere on the planet is it safer and easier to express one's opinion. Fighting for free speech in the West is like fighting for a local whole foods shop amidst a global famine. The real problem is of course elsewhere. How "free" is Musk to address this problem on a global scale? Will China still buy Tesla if he tackles free speech in a country where one false word ( regardless which pronoun) can end you up in a labour camp?

Yes, the exclusion of Donald was a controversial decision. I agree ( as probably everyone on the board at Twitter would) that it was a highly debatable topic, maybe they should have allowed him to continue. It was a very difficult situation with strong arguments for both sides. After letting him lie for years and years ( remember the tweet that global warming is an invention of China?) they had enough. But was he subsequently robbed of his right of free speech? He was and is one of the most listened and broadcasted individuals of all time. His audience is still massive. The impact of his ban was in the end negligible, maybe even helped him. Or just imagine there would be no Twitter at all. Nobody ever invented it. Would the world be any different? Would we be deprived of any basic right?

Additionally, let's be honest. We all select the media we trust according to our political views, not the other way around. Liberals watch MSNBC, and the deep south is tuning in to Fox etc. The very same happens at Twitter. You choose who to follow, and it is this pre-selection of opinions that has a far bigger effect than any "censorship" by some silicon valley hippie. In the future 100% might be able to post on Twitter, instead of 99.9 % today. Big deal. You all will still read the "news" that confirm your opinion, you will still watch selected youtube clips, you will still have mostly friends that largely share your views and values. Twitter will not burst our social bubbles.

Imagine what could have been achieved with 44 Billion. How many lives could have been saved, how many poor kids could have received actual help etc.

What a waste.
This could be said for an infinite number of misinformed and decadent miscalculations on our planet. The sum of money is not the point. The point is the media and tech platforms in the USA have been utterly captured by a deep left leaning agenda with no tolerance for any dissenting views. Talk of China and Russia all you like, but Musk knows our overlords are taking us there as well. I am over the moon that Musk did this, if not only to expose the lunatic hypocrisy of the legacy media having convulsions over not being able to control the narrative anymore and dog piling on anyone who thinks differently. The conversation is well overdue. Debate used to be part of civilized society. Now it is classified as a microagression for not believing someone else's viewpoint. Progess can never happen this way. Homogeneity of thought is the cornerstone of authoritarianisim.
Bindair Dundat is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 02:58
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunnydale
Posts: 214
Originally Posted by Bindair Dundat View Post
This could be said for an infinite number of misinformed and decadent miscalculations on our planet. The sum of money is not the point. The point is the media and tech platforms in the USA have been utterly captured by a deep left leaning agenda with no tolerance for any dissenting views. Talk of China and Russia all you like, but Musk knows our overlords are taking us there as well. I am over the moon that Musk did this, if not only to expose the lunatic hypocrisy of the legacy media having convulsions over not being able to control the narrative anymore and dog piling on anyone who thinks differently. The conversation is well overdue. Debate used to be part of civilized society. Now it is classified as a microagression for not believing someone else's viewpoint. Progess can never happen this way. Homogeneity of thought is the cornerstone of authoritarianisim.
Who owns the majority of the media in the U.K.. (and the USA but I can’t be bothered to do the research at 4am) The left or the right. The biggest privately owned media companies are owned by Rupert Murdoch, the Barclay brother and trinity mirror.

But they’ve managed to convince you it’s the left driving the agenda.

As Baudelaire wrote The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.
back to Boeing is online now  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 03:07
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 182
Originally Posted by SpringHeeledJack View Post
So, Twitter has been prised from it's present owners into the hands of Mr Musk, a mercurial 'World's richest man' who has vowed to promote free speech and is rustling up $45,000,000,000 for this pleasure. The US political left is apparently imploding at this development and the search function's of various browsers have spiked due to 'How do I delete my twitter account' requests in the last days

I have never tweeted, nor if i'm honest really understood Twitter or the Twitterverse.and am completely at a loss as to why it might be worth $45Billion. As I'm sure some of you on here might well use Twitter, would you be kind enough to explain it to me ? Sort of as a layman user, rather than having to read a wiki on the subject.
The board has voted to accept a possible sale to Musk, awaiting a significant amount of fact-finding on both sides. Contrary to popular press he doesn't own it. It remains up to the shareholders to approve the sale.

Twitter collects user information for sales to advertisers. That's who actually pays for the "free" service and that's what makes it worth anything.

It's tough to say if Musk will even bother following through.

The most notable return is Tucker Carlson - who deleted the offending tweet he was on hold for, but claiming it was because Musk bought the company, which he hasn't quite yet. Lots of disinformation.

What isn't clear is why the far right cares. They have Truth Social where they have been able to say anything they want, but somehow that has not only been a failure, there are a large number of reports of users banned for not toeing the line. So yeah, a few dozen on the left say stuff. It's in line with the time a bunch of people burned their Nikes.

Frankly I enjoy seeing Carlson getting pushback on his Twitter feed - for as many supporters as he claims so few are there to back him. But as long as he's rooting for Putin to win I'm plenty happy seeing him getting abused, but the question is, would a no-holds-barred Twitter be his best buddy when his home address and whereabouts are posted? It's clear that Musk has been annoyed by the Where's Elon's Plane twitter feed.

So, it remains to be seen as to whether the micromanagement that Musk tends towards can stretch over another company.
MechEngr is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 03:07
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 23,362
Originally Posted by SASless View Post
Nutty,

Why would you think that?

You coming from the land of Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park and all.....where anyone can get on the soapbox and say whatever they fancy.

Why should Twitter, if dedicated to free speech, be any different?

Do you advocate limiting who can speak at the Corner?

If you do not.... but think Trump should continue to be banned from Twitter....what does that say about your fealty to the concepts of free speech?
You really believe that?

read

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...k-b953323.html


Apreacher who subjected a gay man to a barrage of homophobic abuse during a debate at Speakers’ Corner has been convicted of a hate crime.

Omar Mohamad, 65, known as Uncle Omar called his victim “filthy” and “a creature” during the six-minute tirade in Hyde Park on October 6 2019.

He ranted that his rival was “worse than a terrorist” because of his sexuality and accused him of “spreading AIDs”, City of London Magistrates’ Court heard on Wednesday.

The victim, who is a convert to Islam, had alleged Mohamad was glorifying terrorism in his speeches at Speakers’ Corner, which prompted the verbal attack.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 04:22
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,714
Originally Posted by Sam Ting Wong View Post

At the same time some believe in the West "you can't say your opinion anymore" etc. Or take the gender pronoun and free speech discussion by Jordan Peterson. Or the rants of Tucker Carlson. These individuals all claim there is no free speech, but at the same time attract a huge amount of listeners and viewers, literally millions. Absurd and self-contradicting.
Reminds of of this Netflix parody, Phoebe from Friends is playing the part of a right wing commentator in modern “conservative voices are being silenced!” America:


Originally Posted by Bindair Dundat View Post
The sum of money is not the point. The point is the media and tech platforms in the USA have been utterly captured by a deep left leaning agenda with no tolerance for any dissenting views.
What rubbish.

On supposed “deep left” Twitter you can find prominent right wing conservatives like Ben Shapiro, Candace Owens, Sarah Palin, Majorie Taylor Greene, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Ron DeSantis and Rudy Giuliani all with at least 1 million followers, tweeting nonsense all day long.
dr dre is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 06:25
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: USA
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
Let’s hope he doesn’t let Trump back on it.
So this kind of censorship is exactly the reason why Musk bought the platform.
If you want this kind of thing, why not live in North Korea ?
Test Monkey is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 06:33
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: USA
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
Just to re-iterate Twitter isn’t “anti free speech” for fun, they have strict policies re Covid misinformation for example. You don’t have the freedom speech of speech to post Covid hoax or anti vaccine content in their platform. As they are a private company that is their right btw. Trump was kicked off due to incitement of violence post January 6th, not because hey disagreed with his views. Trump’s said he won’t return to Twitter even if Musk lets him.

“Free speech” means you aren’t arrested by a government for an opinion (unless directly calling for harm). It doesn’t mean a private company has to let everyone use their platform to spread nonsense.

Nonsense..
FREE SPEECH =FREE SPEECH .. that’s why Musk bought it,. BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU DONT LIKE IT
Trump is entitled to it too.. even if you don’t agree with him.
Test Monkey is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 06:37
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 56
Posts: 2,401
prominent right wing conservatives like Ben Shapiro, Candace Owens, Sarah Palin, Majorie Taylor Greene, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Ron DeSantis and Rudy Giuliani all with at least 1 million followers, tweeting nonsense all day long.
So they do same as prominent left wing "progressives", spouting idiotic, nonscientific, stupid stuff all day.

Lets call it a draw then ?
His dudeness is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 07:35
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,714
Originally Posted by His dudeness View Post
So they do same as prominent left wing "progressives", spouting idiotic, nonscientific, stupid stuff all day.

Lets call it a draw then ?
I wasn’t claiming leftists or progressives have been silenced, but someone was claiming the “deep left” had captured “big tech”, just pointing out the “deep left captured big tech” is still allowing conservatives to tweet all day long.

The only real threats to “free speech” I can see in the US are coming from Republicans, burning and banning books, retaliation against corporations that vocally oppose their policies. Ron DeSantis’s Florida seems to be the number one hotbed for free speech suppression in the US at the moment.
dr dre is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 07:51
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,447
Certainly in the UK the whole notion of "free speech" has at best been watered down, or at worst, more realistically eliminated. You only have to look at the number of people who have been lambasted sometimes prosecuted, for speaking freely - there is an thread running on Jet Blast at the moment discussing just such an incident.

I would have thought that, since "free speech" isn't a one sided right, Vladimir Putin and his ilk are rubbing their hands with glee, along with the likes of Trump, at the very idea of being able to post what they want, truth or lies on Musk's brave new Twitter. Unless of course free speech is going to be defined solely by the views and opinions of one very wealthy American egomaniac.
ATNotts is online now  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 10:32
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,714
Originally Posted by Test Monkey View Post
Nonsense..
FREE SPEECH =FREE SPEECH .. that’s why Musk bought it,. BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU DONT LIKE IT
Trump is entitled to it too.. even if you don’t agree with him.
Actually no.

There are multiple laws restricting “free speech” in any country. Defamation, obscenity laws, classified information, public security laws, copyright law, labelling regulations, privacy laws, non disclosure agreements, vilification laws, media broadcasting regulations, etc

Private companies have a right to regulate speech on their platforms, you have restrictions on your speech in your employment.

They exist in all countries and each of them restricts freedom of speech or expression in some way.

Muslim seems to be a bit of a hypocrite, word is he had no hesitation firing employees who “exercised their free speech” and disagreed with him at Tesla.
dr dre is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 10:34
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 73
Posts: 9,355
Originally Posted by SpringHeeledJack View Post
I have never tweeted, nor if i'm honest really understood Twitter or the Twitterverse.and am completely at a loss as to why it might be worth $45Billion. As I'm sure some of you on here might well use Twitter, would you be kind enough to explain it to me ? Sort of as a layman user, rather than having to read a wiki on the subject.
Don't use it; never have; never will; couldn't give a toss.
chevvron is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 10:56
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 23,362
Here is an interesting question then, Free speech

Say someone posts vilest sickest images or text on Twitter, be it pornographic, homophobic or regligious hate etc that are illegal in XYZ Countries and those Countries threaten to sue Twitter if they are not taken down, a case that he knows he cannot win,

does he state it is the freedom of the individual to post them and not remove them claiming they are nothing to do with Twitter who's platform is carrying them, or does he remove them and thus censor the content of Twitter?
NutLoose is online now  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 11:41
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: X marks the spot
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
I wasn’t claiming leftists or progressives have been silenced, but someone was claiming the “deep left” had captured “big tech”, just pointing out the “deep left captured big tech” is still allowing conservatives to tweet all day long.
Yeah take Twitter as an example and it's the other way around...

"According to a 27-page research document, Twitter found a “statistically significant difference favouring the political right wing” in all the countries except Germany. Under the research, a value of 0% meant tweets reached the same number of users on the algorithm-tailored timeline as on its chronological counterpart, whereas a value of 100% meant tweets achieved double the reach. On this basis, the most powerful discrepancy between right and left was in Canada (Liberals 43%; Conservatives 167%), followed by the UK (Labour 112%; Conservatives 176%). Even excluding top government officials, the results were similar, the document said."

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...d-news-outlets
Clop_Clop is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 11:44
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: 5Y
Posts: 578
Originally Posted by Sue Vêtements View Post
...and how's that working out?
One of the weirder obsessions in the USA is with interpreting the original intent of the “founding fathers”; a bunch of normal, fallible people, of their time and environment. No other democracy gives a flying **** what was originally intended by whatever random combination of people “founded” the nation. They focus on what’s the best thing to do now given what we know and what we believe to be rational.

That’s what leads to totally mad conversations about the meaning of various amendments. It’s almost as mad as arguing to base modern law on an arbitrary collection of documents 1,000s of years old as I recently heard in the abortion debate in the USA and also by Taliban in Afghanistan.

Last edited by double_barrel; 27th Apr 2022 at 12:22.
double_barrel is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 12:27
  #38 (permalink)  

Flashes from the Archives of Oblivion
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: 03 ACE
Age: 71
Posts: 962
A significant number of Twitter numbers known to
El Grifo is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 13:08
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,733
I got an account to moan to Virgin Aus about losing my baggage, and to moan to VW about their failure to honour their warranty.

Er, that's it.

If a rich man wants to make other folk rich by buying up their shares in something.......good for him.

As to the meeja, in the USA it is difficult to get "neutral" meeja. Those on the Coasts tend one way, middle America tends another way.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2022, 15:18
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mostly in my own imagination
Posts: 129
Originally Posted by double_barrel View Post
One of the weirder obsessions in the USA is with interpreting the original intent of the “founding fathers”
I never understood "Originalism" Apparently, neither did Thomas Jefferson as this quote from a letter he wrote to Samuel Kercheval in 1816 carved into the Southeast Portico of the Jefferson Memorial says:

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as a civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
Sue Vêtements is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.