The December Harvard CAPS / Harris Poll is out this week and Mark Penn and his colleagues have some interesting results to share. Despite the refusal of many in the media to cover the Twitter files, nearly two-thirds of voters believe Twitter shadow-banned users and engaged in political censorship during the 2020 election. Seventy percent of voters want new national laws protecting users from corporate censorship.
This week, the media continued to fulfill that common view of a de facto state media by ignoring new evidence of FBI coordination in censorship targets with Twitter in the latest news blackout.
On Friday, Twitter released additional information showing that the FBI and CIA actively pushed for censorship, supplying lists of accounts to be suspended or banned.
Journalist Matt Taibbi described Twitter as acting as a “subsidiary” of the FBI and wrote that “between January 2020 and November 2022, there were over 150 emails between the FBI and former Twitter Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth.”
The evidence continues to establish a system of censorship by surrogate or proxy. While the First Amendment applies to the government and not private corporations generally, it does apply to agents or surrogates of the government. Twitter now admits that such a relationship existed between its former officials and the government.
Once again, however, the major networks and newspapers have largely ignored the story. There has been a full mobilization of media, political, and business interests against Elon Musk and Twitter to oppose the restoration of free speech protections at the company. The media is heavily invested in suppressing this story after years of denials of any problems of censorship. Previously, they denied censorship was occurring. When such censorship became obvious, they denied that there was any involvement of the FBI and the government. Now that such involvement is confirmed, they are simply not covering the story.
Instead, the media is “all-in” on the doxxing suspensions (which Musk has now lifted). I have been critical of Musk’s response to the doxxing controversy. In part this is due to the scope of the suspensions and the fact that they occurred only 24 hours after the new policy was implemented. I would have preferred warnings and further clarity on the issue, particularly in what constituted doxxing in some of these tweets from journalists.
Despite the overwhelming coverage, there is little explanation of the media’s approach to the underlying doxxing question. Some have said that this is a “grey area” or may be below the threshold.
For years, the media has supported suspensions due to doxxing. In this case, the location of Musk’s plane may have been used by an individual to threaten his family. Most reports omit any discussion of whether the sending of such live locations information is doxxing. If it is, it has long been banned by most sites and journalists are not exempt.
Previously, figures connected with mainstream media from CNN to the Washington Post have been accused of doxxing. Liberal groups were accused of doxxing conservative justices and others, including dangerously posting information on the children of Justice Amy Coney Barrett. It does not seem to matter when the targets are conservative, Republican, or libertarian.
Writers who have long advocated the banning of others with opposing views are some of the loudest objecting in the wake of the doxxing controversy. The Washington Post’s Taylor Lorenz expressed fear that she could be next. It may not be a groundless fear since Lorenz has been previously accused of doxxing others and described the reintroduction of free speech protections for others as the opening of “the gates of hell.”
Jack Sweeney, the creator of this site (using publicly available information), has expressed shock at being sued and suspended. However, these articles continue to tellingly omit one of the critical issues. Is it doxxing to supply people with the minute-by-minute movement of the plane used by Musk and his family? That would seem relevant to weighing the merits of these suspensions.
Such slanted coverage is clearly losing its hold on the public or its view of Twitter. Indeed, the media continues to write off a large percentage of readers and viewers with openly biased coverage. The public is not buying it. It is buying Twitter. Not only are users signing up in record numbers, but a recent poll shows a majority of Americans “support Elon Musk’s ongoing efforts to change Twitter to a more free and transparent platform.”
In the wake of the latest release, the FBI issued a statement that said that there was nothing to see here and that “the FBI regularly engages with private sector entities to provide information specific to identified foreign malign influence actors’ subversive, undeclared, covert, or criminal activities.”
The statement is notable for what it does not contain: any recognition of the seriousness of the allegations or pledge to conduct its own investigation in whether this relationship crossed over to de facto government censorship. According to some reports, as many as 80 FBI agents may have been tasked to assist in the censorship efforts. Yet, the FBI has offered little more than a shrug in the face of credible constitutional concerns.
According to the Harvard/Harris poll, the public believes that such censorship occurred and warrants action. The denials of the FBI and the dismissal of the mainstream media will only serve to magnify such calls for action.
A legal and constitutional way for the FBI and CIA to counter freedom of speech is with “more” speech. These agencies could fact check concerning posts then provide factual counter-points. These agencies could hire someone like Ira Glasser (very missed ACLU voice) or Jonathan Turley as consultants to help choose the best counter-point free speech.
For example: when Trump said drinking bleach could cure Covid and then some people drank bleach. The FBI and CIA could provide a factual counterpoint that Trump got that information from a fake preacher serving a prison sentence in the nation of Columbia and no other medical source confirmed Trump’s opinion. That factual counter point likely would have prevented many bleach poisoning cases plus it’s legal and constitutional.
Totally false. Even Politifact and CNN admitted the same with “fact checks.” https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/07/13/fact-check-did-trump-tell-people-to-drink-bleach-to-kill-coronavirus/113754708/
Right, he said “injection” of disinfectant, not drinking it.
Your example is an example of spinning the truth. There’s a slight difference between having Dr Brix on stage and Trump asking her about testing light or a disinfectant in treating COVID. She the expert should have explained the difference between in Vito and ex Vivian testing. Dr. Brix silence should have been the focus and she should have been fired.
In my opinion there are two big stories here: First of course is the intelligence agencies getting into bed with Twitter to advocate for banning certain conservative voices, DOMESTIC conservative voices and conservative voices benignly using jokes and humorous memes to make a valid point. The second big story is the media that not only supported such bans of opposing views but now tries to either ignore what happened or tell us that it is no big deal that it happened.
The smaller story is the fact that we had little kids getting such big egos throwing their weight around by banning people at their own whim or at the behest of the FBI. Little people like Yoel Roth actually banning a president having such power going to his slanted, unformed head made these kids go way to far. I think the same dynamic is playing out in the media right now, young idiots feeling their oats saying to each other “hey, we just won’t cover this news story because we rule the world”.
PS. If the young idiots running Twitter and todays media, kids that have been ruined by our education system, had either half a brain or at least the ability to use self-reflection, had maybe banned the Ayatollah and the Taliban they may have gotten away with banning the AMERICAN PRESIDENT, but no, in their swollen ego driven mania they felt they could do anything and now we see the results. It is the same youthful mindset that gave is SBF and FTX. MORONS who think they know everything.
I don’t know if it’s newsworthy, but it’s interesting to me that some lower ranking Twitter employees forcefully and persuasively argued that Trump did not violate Twitter’s terms of service and therefore should not be banned.
But the decision makers at the top ignored those arguments. They wanted him permanently censored and so they permanently banned him. And made up new rules on the fly to justify doing so.
Most oath-sworn employees/contractors working at the FBI and CIA are probably really good brave and patriotic Americans but they appear to take illegal orders from agency top management – based on public intelligence abuses uncovered by Congress and the Press.
If these government employees/contractors are not trained properly (and annually) in their “constitutional oath of office”, these good government employees could easily have flawed interpretations of loyalty.
These good government employees also have rent, mortgages, college education, etc. like the rest of us. If they refuse to follow illegal orders from agency top management, they have real consequences to refusing illegal orders (like censorship that violates the 1st Amendment rights of Americans).
America’s supreme loyalty oath – as a condition to hold governing authority – is an “indirect” loyalty oath. FBI and CIA officials don’t swear loyalty to the nation directly. They don’t swear loyalty to the people directly.
They swear loyalty to the “constitutional rule of law”. The Framers of the Constitution – based on 2000 years of world history predating the ratification of the U.S. Constitution – believed the best way to protect the nation and it’s people was an “indirect” loyalty oath to a U.S. Constitution that protected individual freedoms and rights.
If the FBI and CIA are going to break the law (criminal code Title 18 US Code 245), why not do it to prevent censorship? At least that goal is loyal to the American Oath of Office.
I’ve posted several times that there is a ruling class in America.
“Now that such involvement is confirmed, they are simply not covering the story.”
The involvement of FBI in social media censorship was actually confirmed well before these “Twitter files” releases, via discovery and various related filings in the Missouri v Biden censorship lawsuit —
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/
— where preliminary expedited discovery is slowly winding down. Assuming Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss fails, there will be a ruling on a yet-to-be-filed Amended Motion for Preliminary Injunction (presently scheduled to be filed by mid-February), and it currently looks like that ruling will be coming in early April, depending on how many more delays Defendants can manufacture.
Even prior to the concurrent “Twitter Files” releases, the case files indicate that there’s little doubt about censorship violative of the First Amendment having occurred, so the interest shifts to what form the relief would take, assuming the Motion for Protective Order is granted, and how such an injunction could be enforced. How could censorship collusion between the government and social media be monitored and prevented?
Anyway, it seems probable that “the media” (ill-defined as that expression is) would have to cover the censorship story in the wake of a Court ruling granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, though that coverage would certainly have more spin than a Bob Gibson slider.
Professor Turley follows so many important and/or odd court cases – I wonder why not Missouri v Biden. Love your closing reference.
Thanks. I was originally going to write “more spin than a Luis Tiant Cuban palmball,” but the palmball doesn’t really have that much spin, so that would have been a less accurate (although more colorful) baseball reference. Plus, I really loved Luis Tiant and the whole INDIANS pitching staff back when he was with the TRIBE.
I’m not sure what’s with Professor Turley’s failure to reference the Missouri v Joetard case, unless maybe there are restriction placed upon references to an ongoing case. Most of the cases he references seem to be settled. But not all, I think. Anyway, it IS curious that he finds so much interest in the “Twitter files” and so little apparent interest in the case that’s likely to DO SOMETHING about the First Amendment violations. To me, the “Twitter files” are just details related to what everyone already knew was happening, but the court case brings the anticipation of something actually getting done beyond yammering about it in the media, and the mystery of what form any relief might take.
Soon we will have 100 comments by Svelaz trying to STILL claim that Twitter didn’t shadow ban anyone.
The arguments of the left are getting more and more ridiculous every time we learn more about their actions.
Hullbobby, you don’t believe svelax! I’m shocked!
Hullbobby, twitter doesn’t shadow ban. Do you know what shadow banning is?
You haven’t proven the “left’ wrong yet.
Keep track of all my posts, and let me know when I’ve reached my limit.
Either you are ill informed or you are arguing about names.
Twitter both bans people, bans specific tweets, and has innumerable means to artificially suppress the distribution of a tweet.
Further they have done so almost exclusively to conservatives.
You claimed to have read the twitter files – clearly you have not.
You also have not paid attention to several court cases in the past year in which these processes have been established under oath.
Finally you are ignoring the fact that the former twits fired by musk have admitted, even reveled in much of this.
The only people making your arguments are those ill informed.
Two thirds seems to be the magic number in this Harvard Harris poll
— two thirds believe Twitter (and Facebook and…) censors (I’m hoping the other third are like me and just don’t care and do not believe it doesn’t censor)
— two thirds believe illegal border crossings ran at about a 250,000 annual rate this year (off by a factor of 10)
— two thirds still want stronger immigration control even thinking the number of unlawfully present people in the country is going up at a rate one tenth of the actual rate (all we need is current law enforced)
— two thirds want a law saying Twitter (and Facebook and…) cannot censor (bad idea: does that mean Professor Turley cannot censor?)
— two thirds think inflation is still increasing (duh… isn’t it always increasing… have we had deflation in the U.S. since the 1930s?)
But half of Democrats think Hunter’s laptop was a Russian plant (sorry, I swore I would never post anything again about Hunter’s laptop but that was too significant to ignore)
(Source: Bloomberg; I did not actually go to the poll itself)
Federal Bureau of Information
How many accounts the FBI identified for action by Twitter were “malign foreign actors” engaged in influence operations as stated by the FBI in its response? From Taibbi’s thread, most appear to have been domestic, and many of them jokes, satire or otherwise inconsequential. I hope similar exposure is given to the Covid-19 censorship by the so-called public health authorities.
How many accounts the FBI identified for action by Twitter were “malign foreign actors” engaged in influence operations as stated by the FBI in its response?
“Malign foriegn actors” is the tell. The IC (intelligence community) is hiding behind the lie of ‘national security’ to spy in US citizens. Spied on a Presidential Campaign, not investigating a crime…. but as a Counter Intelligence operation. Complete with real spies infiltrating the campaign.
How about the fabricated Trump Document dispute? Doing an National defense threat assessment.
Twitter? Malign foreign actors.
The IC is now the 4th branch of govt. Only it is impossible to conduct oversight, because all of their claims (malign foreign actors) cant be discussed.
They think we are fools who fail to see that the accounts they identified for censorship had nothing to do with malign foreign actors.
“They think we are fools . . .”
You mean you don’t accept it, just because they asserted it? Careful. You’re verging on “political hooliganism.”
“Despite the refusal of many in the media to cover the Twitter files, nearly two-thirds of voters believe Twitter shadow-banned users and engaged in political censorship during the 2020 election.”
*************************************
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Public sentiment is a meaningless concept to the Dims and the Dims-light, the neo cons. Witness our suction into yet another Ukrainetnam. The only thing they recognize is raw power. They are about to see it with their crossroads decision to go all in in Ukraine (and lose – a neo con speciality) or get thoroughly humiliated by Russia by not doing so. The public is totally against this Ukrainian adventure but Biden and his war hawks here and in Great Britain demand it. Heaven help us all if they get their way. Putin is anything but a coward.
Amen. I realize foreign policy is not, necessarily, in Prof Turley’s wheelhouse so to speak, but.. .
Considering the conflict in Ukraine a world changing/altering Seminal Event, with the potential to eclipse the horrific death and destruction of the great world wars during the 20th century, I have followed the war in Ukraine closely [ esp. in ‘western media’]. Very closely.
I’ve never seen anything like it. It’s not just a total blackout concerning anything related to stated/declared ‘Russian interests’ (e.g. a neutral Ukraine, resolution of Ukraine’s civil war), as egregious as that may be, most of ‘the media’s coverage has been completely delusional and divorced from reality from any perspective. Often 180 degrees.
The coordination, scope and scale of media ‘dishonesty’ and disinformation viz Ukraine is off the charts! I’m here to tell you. Either the editors of the New York Times, WaPo, WSJ, Guardian and every other media org. this side of the Rhine all have a Bat phone for latest Ukraine update .. . or they are just making-up delusional nonsense out of thin air.
Imo, there is no way the media, or Twitter executives for that matter, could have known Hunter Biden’s laptop, e.g., was Russian Disinformation without ‘official’ government *authority* to do so. The same is true of Putin’s ‘Completely Unprovoked Peter the Great Russian Imperial War of Aggression in Ukraine’.
*if you can’t trust the Paper of Record, who can you trust?
*if you can’t trust the Paper of Record, who can you trust?”
*************************************
As my Italian father said many times (and I now tell my boys): “the only people you can trust are these people here around our kitchen table.” As usual, he was spot on, dead certain right.
It seems to me the only salient points are that Ukraine has the right to determine it’s own foreign and military policy regardless of the opinions or fears of a neighboring former invader/colonizer, and that a war of territorial conquest on European soil is completely intolerable today. The Sudetenland Excuse was tried already and the world made quite plain that ethnic or linguistic affinity is not grounds for invasion or occupation.
currentsitguy:
“It seems to me the only salient points are that Ukraine has the right to determine it’s own foreign and military policy regardless of the opinions or fears of a neighboring former invader/colonizer, ”
***************************
That’s certainly the facile approach disregarding Ukraine’s premeditated breach of the Minsk accords, 10,000 dead Eastern Ukraine Russian speakers (at the hands of the corrupt Ukrainan regime) in the “breakaway” regions, Russia’s 8-year warning about its response to the former, Slavic history and Russia’s role in it, neocon designs on power, Uraine as the bagman for the corrupt Dims and most every other geopolitical consideration that thoughtful folks would consider “salient.” But hey, I suppose the “Cuban Missle Crisis” was just a “big guy picking on a little guy” situation, too.
Ck below.
Many people have serious cases of cognitive dissonance.
They Curse the UK & US for chasing Empires in the past yet demand the US go off again chasing Empire in places like Ukraine, Syria, etc., today.
I suggest the US shuts down most all of it’s Intel groups like CIA aka State Dept, Harvard, NGOs & most of the rest.
Here’s a small piece of the kind of info people get from vivabarneslaw.local.com :
(I always felt there was something very wrong with Gorka long before this new info.)
********
Gorka, who recently attacked Thomas Massie and continues to whore for war, was a son of Hungarian refugees recruited by British military intelligence at the end of the Cold War, sent to Hungary after the end of the Cold War, promoted often by Defense Industry advocates throughout his career, outed as a likely British spy by a prior Hungarian government, and is likely still serving his military industry patrons.
I think George Washington is very correct, even to today, in that the USA Govt should keep our Noses out of other foreign notions affairs!!!!
A lot of you people’s intent is very clear, you Love Adolf Hitler & his Nazis & you wish to fight for his causes.
But at the least don’t ask the American Citizens to pay more Taxes for your Fantasy 2nd dance with Ms Fascist Rotten Crotch!
Just leave Us, go to Europe, they need more bodies. Ukraine is now reported to have Lost against the Russians. Over a 100,000 dead Ukrainian soldiers, plus injured, that the Uk’ Govt can’t replace.
Ref: Col Mac Gregory, Infowars & others.
**********
https://www.infowars.com/posts/twitter-allows-neo-nazi-blood-soil-rituals-by-azov-battalion-to-herald-war-with-russia-but-bans-ye-for-posting-religious-unification-symbol/
**********
https://www.infowars.com/posts/us-sends-infantry-unit-to-base-just-miles-away-from-russian-border-in-estonia/
The Country has grown but the number of individuals polled declined. Questions seem crafted just line the Trump generated pools with questions that answer themselves. Interesting.
Do you mean to say that Harvard and Harris support Trump?
Also vital to this issue:
Each and every FBI and CIA official swears a constitutional Oath of Office NOT to violate the 1st Amendment rights of any person on U.S. soil.
This is not simple law breaking by loyal federal employees, but agency managers violating their supreme loyalty oath. Law breaking for disloyal end goals. One cannot work for these agencies without taking this oath.
Stochastic treason, is it not?
The real danger here is “covert” censorship. Can the person censored challenge the censors through an overt appeals process? Is there a “judicial warrant” to censor signed by a judge?
What if the citizen is punished covertly, is there an “electronic paper trail” that a judge or jury can refer to? If it’s “covert” any censor can make up anything, with no risk of consequences.
Now that the Liberals-of-Academia (Dems) see that the Tide has turned,
They “Demand Congressional Action”, a move that distorts the facts that They themselves were using these Platforms to Control a portion of the Populous to favor (vote for) Their position(s).
No One (Dem or Rep) ever doubted the ‘Power-of-the-Platform’, indeed They knew it would lead to the ‘Power-of-the-Purse’ (Congressional Spending & Control).
Don’t be Fooled by this ‘Cover Your Tracks’ cry for Congressional Action.
A – Harvard/Harris poll – Yeah Right, Ha.
Agree the Social MEdia companies need to be out of politics. Also, the FBI, CIA and other Gov’t Agencies need to be reformed and Strong oversight, NO Politics and Censorship. The DEm’s use to be the party of Freedoms now they are the Party of Censorship, Authoritarian, Corruption. Same for a number of old line Republicans like the Cheney’s. Unofrtunately I doubt this will happen on a serious scale for it takes strong leadership and strong penaltis and be willing to fire and prscute and make violators pay a heavy price.
First of all, the plane tracker Information Was Not, “using publicly available information” as Musk was using a PIA ( https://nbaa.org/aircraft-operations/security/privacy/privacy-icao-address-pia/ ) and has just cause to ban all those who doxed him, putting his family at risk. Here’s a Timcast video from yesterday.
Here’s the video explaining the PIA Musk had on his PRIVATE Flights!
The assertion of Mr. Turley that “many in the media” simply refused to cover the “Twitter Files” story is facially, demonstrably untrue. Here is ONE example serving to refute that allegation: There are more.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/elon-musk-promotes-release-internal-twitter-documents-rehashing-platfo-rcna59897
Mr Turley seerms to be providing a direct take on Fox News:
“Meanwhile, ABC’s “World News Tonight,” “CBS Evening News” and “NBC Nightly News” skipped the “Twitter Files” altogether, according to Grabien transcripts.”
While it may be true that networks other than Fox News did not cover THAT story on THAT night, that’s not much to hang your hat on when making such a broad-based assertion. By my viewing, the story was broadly covered through.out the so-called MSM.
Instinctively, I knew this statement to be untrue because I watch NBC News, MSNBC, CNN – and Fox News on a regular basis.
Perhaps Mr. Turley should change the channel from Fox News every now and then.
I
If Mr. Turley is the fair person he purports to be, he should correct this overly-broad, unsubstantiated claim regarding TV coverage of the Twitter Files” episode.
Did you actually read the article you posted ?
It is an opinion piece posting as journalism.
Throughout the story the writer vascilates between – ho-hum – this was already reported – correct, but not by the MSM,
and liberally framing FACTS that do not fit the narrative as alleged.
Ro Kahana could have been quoted, but the actual quote would have undermined the story.
Information is claimed to be unverified – what are the reporters at NBC up to ?
It is pretty easy to verify this. Regardless, when the MSM wants to get behind a story – they just report that any=other outlet reported it.
The NBC reporting goes to an enormous amount of effort to try create doubt about actual facts.
If NBC has doubts – they should do some actual investigative journalism.
JBS:
“Did you actually read the article you posted ?
It is an opinion piece posting as journalism.”
*************************************************
They can’t read, John. They merely ingest and regurgitate. It save a lot of energy by avoiding critical thinking. Believing that article is like believing Goebbels’ take on Jewish accomplishments in Germany before 1930. Yeah, its about the topic but only in a propaganda, lying kinda way.
I do not have a problem with the article – write whatever you want.
I have a problem with calling it journalism or reporting.
Being generous, it is an op-ed posing as reporting.
less generously it is propoganda
Joseph, you are either lying or you don’t have the ability to analyze the “news” reports that you are watching. To say that NBC or CNN is covering this titanic event after seeing these “news” networks deny it is happening, pooh pooh the fact that it is happening or in fact support what Twitter was actually doing in it’s previous incarnation is just a lie with a lot of words. Or more simply…gaslighting.
Thank the media you watch for keeping you in the dark. Why don’t you skip all the media and start reading some solid reporting by real investigative journalists.
Mr.s debien, you lack any documention.
When driving I scan msnbc and cnn. Some days not much, some days, its 6 hours. The cable shows basically do exactly the same stories every hour. You get a really good feel for what they are covering you quickly learn the A block, B block C block, etc.
The cables aren’t covering the twitter files.
Your lack of documentation is also a very LOUD admission that you know this.
“If Mr. Turley is the fair person he purports to be . . .”
Dear Anon Sockpuppet 10k:
If you were the objective person you pretend to be, you’d acknowledge the difference betwen *reporting* and *editorializing*.
ABSO—F*CKING—LUTELY!!! I cannot believe the stupid jerkoffs at Twitter DID what they DID! And the Media!!! For all their influence and censorship WE MAY AS WELL BE LIVING IN THE CCP!!! WTF?!?
Mainstream media ignoring the Twitter revelations is like living in Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945 and ignoring the thud you just heard!
Wow! This is big stuff. The political, academic, and media worlds, often symbionically twinned, lives and dies by polls. This one may indeed force pols to think of the polls!
Musk is doing fine, and he is having fun.
I would suggest that you actually go to twitter andfollow him rather than regurgitating nonsense from the left.
There i a huge hissy fit going on – and you are part of it.
I find it hillarious how little self awareness those on the left have.
Do you understand that by trying turn Musk into Donald Trump, what you actually accomplish is proving that your image of Trump is a straw man ?
Further, you increase the chances of Trump winning in 2024.
There is no reason for Republicans to go with anyone other than Trump if it is blatantly obvious that anyone at odds with the left on anything will get the full Trump treatment.
JBS:
My philosopy on Trump in 2024 is simple. If the Dims don’t want him on the ballot as seems obvious, I want him right there.
If the dims say up, I say down.
I am interested in someone who can win and who will clean house in government, and who will otherwise be successful.
Every single republican contender – or even libertarian should they actually stand a chance,
Will get the Trump treatment.
That is self evident from what is being done to Musk right now.
I take it as a given that any republican will be painted by the left, media, social media as a racist, hateful, hating hater.
j
Elon is banning accounts because he’s annoyed at the fact that his flights can be tracked and they are being shared on Twitter. He promised that such tracking would not be banned. The journalists who were suspended were only reporting on the story, but Elon, the free speech absolutist didn’t like the idea of this story showing everyone that his flights, like those of celebrities can be tracked. He claims it’s doxxing, but tracking flights using publicly available information is not doxxing.
Elon is lying and he’s making excuses to ban or censure information that is at best annoying for a person of his social stature.
Elon is not Donald Trump. But, he is as narcissistic as he is it’s just a slightly different flavor.
He is throwing a hissy fit over the fact that this information is easily available to anyone. Just as it should be available on a digital public square. Elon is proving that he’s no “free speech absolutist”.
“Elon is banning accounts because he’s annoyed at the fact that his flights can be tracked and they are being shared on Twitter. ”
Mind reading.
Regardless, stalking people is a crime in much of the country – including digital stalking.
It is recognized as dangerous.
“He promised that such tracking would not be banned.”
I recall no such promise.
“The journalists who were suspended were only reporting on the story”
Not a story.
“didn’t like the idea of this story showing everyone that his flights, like those of celebrities can be tracked.”
The rule blocks publishing tracking on anyone.
“He claims it’s doxxing, but tracking flights using publicly available information is not doxxing.”
Because it is. doxxing is not restricted to non-public information. Even the left argues that, they just ban different public information, like the names of people who transitioned.
“Elon is lying and he’s making excuses to ban or censure information that is at best annoying for a person of his social stature.”
I am perfectly fine with Elon’s rule. I would like to see it everywhere.
“Elon is not Donald Trump. But, he is as narcissistic as he is it’s just a slightly different flavor.”
So he is very nearly Trump ?
In your addled brain everyone who dies not agree with you is very nearly Trump.
“He is throwing a hissy fit over the fact that this information is easily available to anyone. ”
No, the left is throwing the hissy fit.
If the information is easily available, then there is no public need to share it on twitter.
Examples of hate speech are easily available to anyone – yet the left wants it banned from social media.
“Just as it should be available on a digital public square.”
Funny how SM is only a Digial Public Square now that Musk own’s twitter.
“Elon is proving that he’s no “free speech absolutist”.”
We heard from those of you on the left that business is not subject to the first amendment – that is correct.
Businesses have many factors to balance.
No sane person would argue that a for assembly line is the right place for unlimited free speech,
Disney’s business is expression – yet Disney is learning at significant expense that its expression needs to conform to the demands of its clients.
Social Media today is actually in the advertising business, they provide users the opportunity to speak. those users are then the product they sell to advertisers.
The unsucessful threats of advertisers to boycott twitter should make it clear that SM is not going to a forum for near absolute free speech.
I am glad Musk bought Twitter. the improvements so far are welcome, and I expect many more to come.
But Twitter is NOT ever going to become an absolute free speech platform.
Musk is after the largest possible userbase. that requires banning people who on net cost Twitter users.
Every SM company faces the same dilema. Truth is focuses on Family Friendly. Parler is free with respect to political speech.
Gab is close to actual absolute free speech.
Most of SM is trying to appeal to everyone while supressing as few conservatives as possible while concurrently supressing conservative and libertarian content.
Musk is trying to be family friendly as well as politically neutral. If he succeeds – the other major SM companies will follow.
If he fails – it is his money.
I can’t think of any positive, benign or “newsworthy” reason to post real time coordinates for where Musk is at any given time. I can only think of nefarious reasons.
For example, that info would be posted if you wanted mobs to form to harass Musk wherever he goes. Or worse, if you hoped it would inspire a Democrat voter, similar to the Democrats who tried to execute a baseball field of elected Republicans and a Supreme Court justice to assassinate him.
Can you think of any reason to publish his real time location that is not motivated by evil?
The same people promoted violence on the Supreme Court Justices by revealing locations of them and their children.
The left is inherently violent along with being fascist.
That’s a risk that is always there when information is freely available to anyone. It’s part of that free speech Elon is always gushing over. Elon shut down all twitter spaces that are discussing the story. He’s actively censoring any discussion about the jet-tracking story. Proving once again it’s more about his massive hypocrisy than anything else.
“That’s a risk that is always there when information is freely available to anyone.”
There is. And publishing information that actually leads directly to harm to others is a tort.
Except in SM where S230 immunity bars a lawsuit.
If MSNBC posts a private persons address and someone uses that to rob them, they will be sued successfully.
” He’s actively censoring any discussion about the jet-tracking story.”
No, he has established a rule that bars providing location information for people without their permission.
Musk is thinking about providing the real time coordinates of Twitter users to Twitter advertisers: “Twitter is working on a plan that would force users to opt in to targeted ads, removing a years-old privacy setting that gives users more control over their data, according to a report in the Platformer newsletter. But that’s not all! The new strategy may mandate that you share your location information and let Twitter sell your data to third-parties.”
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-data-must-agree-ads-illegal-1849893232
Anonymous
I did try to read your response, but you talk too much.
And spout garbage.
Sorry to not address your points, but I chose to pass about 1/3 of the way through.
Monument, you saved yourself some time and some aggravation because that comment of Anonymous was asinine.
That’s how I feel about John Says’ comments.
Anonymous just wrote hundreds of words to just say that he is fine with Twitter shadow banning conservatives for jokes and anything else they felt like banning.
He is quite the bloviator.
hullboy, he stole hundred of words from the Atlantic
Twitter does not shadow ban. You don’t even know what shadow banning is.
Not interested in a semantic debate.
Twitter engages in reducing the visibility of content – in multiple different ways.
Most of us call that shadow banning.
Worse its efforts are primarily political targeting conservatives and libertarians.
Why do you steal intellectual content from other people?
There is actually a law against cut and pasting entire articles.
It’s clear you dont even understand the message being conveyed here.
“There is actually a law against cut and pasting entire articles.”
LOL!! no there isn’t. You can cut and paste an entire article here if you want.
You can cut and paste an entire article here if you want.
You added the word ‘here’ to your reply.
So I can play a tape of the Greenbay game on a video blog the next day? The NFL wont say a word?
A video blog is not an article. Nice try.
There is no difference between a vlog and an article.
Many journalists read their articles on a VLOG.
Some only provide content as VLOG’s.
svelaz, “fair use” in copyright law does not extend to making a copy of the entire body of a work. Quotations only, for example for use in a review of the work cited.
U.S. copyright law
+10
We can agree on some things.
Not if it’s copyrighted, you can’t. Turley will delete it for copyright infringement if he’s made aware of it.
You can copy a small amount of copyrighted material under a legal doctrine known as “fair use,” but you cannot copy the entire thing.
No, Svelaz, you can not. Doing so violates copyright law.