It's another attention grab to distract from the real issues. Something like >75% of restaurants in my small town aren't expected to survive. This isn't doing them any good.
The EO says "The Attorney General shall establish a working group" to look at potential "unfair and deceptive acts and practices" by online platforms, and lists as an example of such an act "monitoring or creating watch-lists of users" etc.
Ironically, your post's complete misrepresentation of what the EO says is the sort of thing Twitter should presumably want to append a fact check to.
Woops, that's my fault for reading too quickly. After going over it a couple of more times I agree that your reading is probably more inline with what they meant. In fairness, they're kind of missing a few verbs there and that ambiguity makes it difficult to nail down. I'll get rid of my previous post.
The private company tagged an official statement from the Executive Branch of the USA Federal Government. The American people in 2016 (by selecting a particular individual for Head of State) specifically expressed a desire to receive official government communications in this manner.
All content on Twitter is shown to you as the poster wrote it, but that is about the only guarantee you have as a poster or reader on Twitter. If tweets are removed, they are removed entirely, not edited. How the UI frames any given post is not user-configurable and never was. I don’t see why or how Twitter decorates or annotates posts is relevant. The content was not altered. The context may have been, but it’s Twitter’s site, and that is their prerogative.
When Twitter's CEO decided to enter the political game by picking sides this was bound to happen.
And before anyone starts accusing me of being pro-Trump, I'm not a US citizen, I've never been to the States, I do personally believe that most of the times he says things that are not by the book or that are just plain wrong (but the "duty" of a politician is not to say the correct things or to do the right thing, it is to get re-elected) but nevertheless I do believe that the mail-voting thing is prone to electoral fraud.
I know for sure that were they to suggest a similar thing in my country (I live in Eastern Europe) I'd probably get out on the streets to protest against it (we've had our own share of electoral fraud in our recent history, like "making" dead people vote).
Are there really no non-editorial ways Twitter could have addressed the factual errors? I don’t see the rationale behind picking this fight after so many years, at least in this way.
Twitter didn't censor anything - they didn't remove the tweet, nor did they censor any of the text in the tweet. Not that the facts matter here anyway...
14 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 51.2 ms ] threadHere's the actual EO because of the paywall: https://kateklonick.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/DRAFT-EO-...
It's another attention grab to distract from the real issues. Something like >75% of restaurants in my small town aren't expected to survive. This isn't doing them any good.
Ironically, your post's complete misrepresentation of what the EO says is the sort of thing Twitter should presumably want to append a fact check to.
Exactly. We need to re-open the country again.
And before anyone starts accusing me of being pro-Trump, I'm not a US citizen, I've never been to the States, I do personally believe that most of the times he says things that are not by the book or that are just plain wrong (but the "duty" of a politician is not to say the correct things or to do the right thing, it is to get re-elected) but nevertheless I do believe that the mail-voting thing is prone to electoral fraud.
I know for sure that were they to suggest a similar thing in my country (I live in Eastern Europe) I'd probably get out on the streets to protest against it (we've had our own share of electoral fraud in our recent history, like "making" dead people vote).