Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Social media and the Post's Hunter Biden story

Discussion in 'GatorNana's Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gatorpika, Oct 17, 2020 at 11:14 AM.

  1. gtr2x

    gtr2x GC Hall of Fame

    13,055
    603
    563
    Aug 21, 2007
    Worried?
    You're late to the party. Many have been worried where we are headed for the last 3+ years.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  2. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    9,606
    3,348
    1,123
    Nov 25, 2017
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  3. luvtruthg8r

    luvtruthg8r Premium Member

    628
    154
    193
    Apr 3, 2007
    The fact that what I wrote is absolutely true, which it is, makes me worry about where we already are! Stand up for America, not Russia!
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  4. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    9,606
    3,348
    1,123
    Nov 25, 2017
    Spare us the sanctimony that the country is in trouble because Facebook and Twitter refuse to be used as tools of a Russian intelligence operation to spread false information to sow division and influence an election. The country is in trouble because people like you are so partisan and want to believe it that you ignore the conclusions of the SSCIC and Spread the propaganda like it is gospel. Rendering the Russian op effective. A better question would be why Rusty Giuliani spews this garbage and why you believe it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  5. AgingGator

    AgingGator GC Hall of Fame

    1,926
    386
    408
    Apr 24, 2007
    Do you apply the same logic to yourself and discount everything that Georgie Porgie says on ABC?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. gatorchamps0607

    gatorchamps0607 Always Rasta Premium Member

    50,253
    130,105
    2,218
    Aug 14, 2007
    Hendersonville, TN
    This is why the two party system doesn't work and will never work.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    7,777
    2,161
    1,128
    Oct 30, 2017
    I'm not surprised. But many of us are happy that our nation will soon be heading to a much less stupid and incompetent place.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    7,777
    2,161
    1,128
    Oct 30, 2017
    The article violated Twitter's policy/rules. If you don't like it, go to Parler. Private businesses get to do that. The free market has provided alternatives. Our government has to allow speech that is dangerous and that we don't like. Private businesses do not have to do that. They get to choose to regulate however they choose. If I dislike how the business regulates it, I'll take my business elsewhere.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  9. WC53

    WC53 GC Legend

    838
    201
    263
    Oct 17, 2015
    Old City
    It is almost like free speech and freedom of the press refers to governmental actions...

    The damage done by false propaganda, which when repeated daily becomes a religious like mind control (ymmv) I have long (over a decade) ranted against talk radio conspiracies and the devotion they receive from the listeners. Logic suspended.

    We should all want truth published and bs called out. Social media has turned us into a bunch of middle schoolers hyperventilating while waiting for the next rumor. ;). But it it is really up to you, or Q, depending on the availability of lithium

    Go Gators
     
  10. GatorNavy

    GatorNavy Anchors Aweigh Moderator VIP Member

    11,934
    4,136
    1,218
    Apr 9, 2007
    Space Coast
    I would be fine with this if Twitter was consistent with it's censoring decisions. It had no problem with allowing tweets about Trump's taxes when the source was as 'dubious' as the Biden emails. The appearance of being one sided is the issue to me.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  11. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    9,332
    962
    1,353
    Apr 8, 2007
    As a point of information, I don't watch "Georgia Porgie" on ABC. For real news that's delivered without a slant I watch the BBC and PBS.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2020 at 11:31 AM
    • Like Like x 1
  12. GatorRade

    GatorRade Rad Scientist Premium Member

    7,105
    687
    708
    Apr 3, 2007
    At the risk of playing cult advocate here, I think this issue is about who decides what is valid.

    To many, the whole Mueller probe was a coup attempt by Obama and Biden who need to be locked up. If those people are in charge, then clearly no report of Trump’s Russia connections should be published because it’s all deep state disinformation.

    The story sounds idiotic, but if sounding idiotic is the only requirement to be banned, then half of Facebook’s content should be banned.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    6,017
    992
    588
    Apr 16, 2007
    That is a fair point, though I don’t think the veracity of the tax documents were in question, nor were they likely from a foreign influence campaign.

    Giuliani is in the pocket of certain Ukrainians, we already knew this from the Lev Parnas stuff where they were working hand in hand with another conservative hack “journalist” - John Solomon. Giuliani was doing business with those guys, taking $$$, and trying to influence/undermine U.S. policy. He was literally working with criminals, who were ousted from Ukraine. Working with corrupt actors while trying to smear Biden. The fact this story came from Giuliani and was “broken” by a former Hannity producer speaks volumes to me. If our intelligence claims it a foreign intelligence op, there’s no question who to believe.

    Initially I didn’t agree with the takedown, for the exact same reason as your concerns. But with those further details, I think they did the right thing.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2020 at 9:09 AM
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. gatorchamps960608

    gatorchamps960608 GC Hall of Fame

    1,216
    325
    243
    Jul 4, 2020
    I don't know what the percentage is, but a lot of Facebook's misleading content should be banned.

    We can see why Trump struggles in debates because his rhetoric only works in the Fox ecosphere.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. gatorpika

    gatorpika Premium Member

    7,717
    1,175
    1,023
    Sep 14, 2008
    Twitter's policy used to take the Post article down was that they don't allow the sharing of content from hacking and similar sources. So basically if you weren't authorized to have the material. That kind of policy would prevent stuff like Trump's Taxes, the Pentagon Papers, Iraq War Diaries and Snowden's exposure of the NSA if applied consistently. Or if you are considering the truth of the contents of the document, then they should have censored the publication of the Steele Dossier. It was opposition research which contains some truth, some rumors and stuff that isn't true and is intended to be damaging to the target. I don't remember that happening, though there was debate about it in the media. Twitter modified their policy in the wake of this thing to be somewhat more directed at the hackers themselves and typical scam related material rather than material that is supposedly newsworthy. So they are basically fumbling in the dark for something that works and getting a rash of shit at every turn, both from the public and government. So again, ultimately the question is whether or how we want these platforms to be the arbiters of speech and what they can realistically do?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. GatorNavy

    GatorNavy Anchors Aweigh Moderator VIP Member

    11,934
    4,136
    1,218
    Apr 9, 2007
    Space Coast
    What you are saying is really a different issue than what Twitter used to block the Tweets. They simply said it was blocked for publishing info obtained through hacking. That seems to be a selective policy applied by Twitter depending upon the subject and to whom it pertains.
     
  17. gatorpika

    gatorpika Premium Member

    7,717
    1,175
    1,023
    Sep 14, 2008
    Nobody is promoting disinformation. It was stated in the OP and throughout the article that you didn't read or didn't comprehend that the Biden issue is irrelevant to the discussion. The question for this thread is to what extent do we want social media companies to be the gatekeepers for what we get to read. There are good outcomes and bad outcomes and a whole lot of issues. If you just think they can delete all the right wing content you don't like that that will be it, then that's nieve as hell.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. GatorRade

    GatorRade Rad Scientist Premium Member

    7,105
    687
    708
    Apr 3, 2007
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. gatorpika

    gatorpika Premium Member

    7,717
    1,175
    1,023
    Sep 14, 2008
    The Steele Dossier was a good example. The media held off publishing other than mentioning its existence because they knew that it contained a lot of BS. Buzzfeed said eff it and published so they would get the clicks. The editor basically said "we print and you decide", not we have a responsibility to give you accurate information. The media is also far and away better at understanding the implications of what they decide to print than a tech company.

    The Steele Dossier Set the Stage for a Mueller Letdown
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. PacificBlueGator

    PacificBlueGator Senior

    223
    73
    328
    Apr 3, 2007
    Not really the same, the information the NYT obtained on Trump's finances and taxes were legally obtained, probably from sources within the Trump business itself. Trump also corroborated the reporting. For instance, during the town hall he admitted he's at least 400 million in debt, which is what the NYT story claimed. We don't know who he owes it to, at least 200 million to bank of China, and it's coming due shortly. Who else does he owe money to? Does it influence his decisions as POTUS? We have a right to know this and how his actions benefit his businesses directly versus the country. Another example, when challenged on paying only $750 in federal taxes in 2016 during the town hall as the NYT story claims, he didn't dispute it so again corroborating an investigative news story himself. Seems to me the NYT has dotted the i's and crossed the t's.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2