Really, stellar job all around from everyone that still pretends Twitter is a real existent website. Without your adamant support, Elon wouldn't be able to retain half the users he has today and use their addiction to social media to manipulate their perspective on global events.
Hats off! And I bet half of you are going to keep using it because "my field has interesting people there". Yeah?
Pointing out the wrong path does not require providing a good one: it's better to stay put rather than engaging in a bad path.
I totally agree with you about the cesspool that X/Twitter has become.
I believe it _is_ indeed subject to several violations that it could be sued. That it could be even shut down in several liberal democracies even. Freedom of expression does not protect incitation of hate and violence, neither advertising for illegal drugs or proxenetism for one, and Twitter is littered with that, and repeatedly does not moderate. If it even collaborates with authorities. Only it requires prosecutors and states to act.
But putting the responsibility, the blame, on those that use it "for good" (for lack of a better term) is disinvesting the blame on the people actually in charge of the platform: first, Musk, his investors, and engineers/people working there that would have an alternative; second, law enforcement.
Because "media" can span the gamut of "literally made-up lies without substance" and "actual reporting verified by multiple organizations".
Even Rupert Murdoch gets a little respect for his conservative media empire. At least he's doing actual reporting, and not roleplaying as King Shit on a social media formerly ruined by a crypto-maxi.
Elon isn't reporting news because that would imply he corrects himself when his "reports" are proven wrong.
Many of them didn't talk about it in the first place, because it was originally reported by a source that refused to let anyone independently verify their claims. The first people to speak up on it were the least educated, and by the time an actually reputable and detailed report was making the rounds everyone either moved on or had already accused the media of "lying".
You really cannot choose a worse example than the Hunter Biden laptop story. That was one of the few examples of liberal media taking the necessary precautions, and even the conservative news outlets were afraid to make claims that could be seen as libel if they weren't independently verified. No serious news sources, conservative or liberal, reported on the original Hunter Biden laptop story.
If you're going to be pissed when 4chan threads don't make national news overnight, I've got a hell of a political bridge to sell you.
2/ Especially since "left" and "right" barely mean anything now that far-right, no, even human-denyingly-insane-far-right ideas make it on the political spectrum and even so-called moderate media journalists do not dare shut down at once.
Yes, that's something that's perfectly doable and even required by the profession of journalism: when a guest states something that has been debated in the past, found to be deadly, or stupid, or false, it is perfectly deontologic to contradict and even shut down the mic, and counter claim. That's even the bare minimum. Guess what, in the countries where journalists do so, there are no extreme political party running anywhere noticeable.
When journalists do not keep Karens and politicians in check in regards to reality, they fail the duty of their job.
3/ Elon is not left, or right either. He's authoritarian.
Really, stellar job all around from everyone that still pretends Twitter is a real existent website. Without your adamant support, Elon wouldn't be able to retain half the users he has today and use their addiction to social media to manipulate their perspective on global events.
Hats off! And I bet half of you are going to keep using it because "my field has interesting people there". Yeah?
Your rant is like blaming drug addicts for the existence of cartels: ineffective.
So let's hear your brilliant idea for FDA regulating social media, then. What's the "safe" alternative, a federal takeover?
Pointing out the wrong path does not require providing a good one: it's better to stay put rather than engaging in a bad path.
I totally agree with you about the cesspool that X/Twitter has become.
I believe it _is_ indeed subject to several violations that it could be sued. That it could be even shut down in several liberal democracies even. Freedom of expression does not protect incitation of hate and violence, neither advertising for illegal drugs or proxenetism for one, and Twitter is littered with that, and repeatedly does not moderate. If it even collaborates with authorities. Only it requires prosecutors and states to act.
But putting the responsibility, the blame, on those that use it "for good" (for lack of a better term) is disinvesting the blame on the people actually in charge of the platform: first, Musk, his investors, and engineers/people working there that would have an alternative; second, law enforcement.
People on the left control 90% of the media. Why is it so bad that someone who isn't on the left owns a media site?
Because "media" can span the gamut of "literally made-up lies without substance" and "actual reporting verified by multiple organizations".
Even Rupert Murdoch gets a little respect for his conservative media empire. At least he's doing actual reporting, and not roleplaying as King Shit on a social media formerly ruined by a crypto-maxi.
Elon isn't reporting news because that would imply he corrects himself when his "reports" are proven wrong.
I'm pretty sure there is still mainstream media that haven't issued a retraction for calling the Hunter Biden laptop story fake.
Talk about election interference.
Many of them didn't talk about it in the first place, because it was originally reported by a source that refused to let anyone independently verify their claims. The first people to speak up on it were the least educated, and by the time an actually reputable and detailed report was making the rounds everyone either moved on or had already accused the media of "lying".
You really cannot choose a worse example than the Hunter Biden laptop story. That was one of the few examples of liberal media taking the necessary precautions, and even the conservative news outlets were afraid to make claims that could be seen as libel if they weren't independently verified. No serious news sources, conservative or liberal, reported on the original Hunter Biden laptop story.
If you're going to be pissed when 4chan threads don't make national news overnight, I've got a hell of a political bridge to sell you.
> People on the left control 90% of the media.
1/ Documentation to support that claim, please.
2/ Especially since "left" and "right" barely mean anything now that far-right, no, even human-denyingly-insane-far-right ideas make it on the political spectrum and even so-called moderate media journalists do not dare shut down at once.
Yes, that's something that's perfectly doable and even required by the profession of journalism: when a guest states something that has been debated in the past, found to be deadly, or stupid, or false, it is perfectly deontologic to contradict and even shut down the mic, and counter claim. That's even the bare minimum. Guess what, in the countries where journalists do so, there are no extreme political party running anywhere noticeable.
When journalists do not keep Karens and politicians in check in regards to reality, they fail the duty of their job.
3/ Elon is not left, or right either. He's authoritarian.