Social media executive order comindy

[tomxreef]

It wasn't about the president - please remove the political side of it. It was a simple question of who is going to fact check a couple hundred million tweets per day unbiased and accurately. Doesn't matter who is doing the tweet the question is the same.

I wouldn’t care if they fact check nobodies like myself. The fact checking is needed to reign in trolls and outright falsehoods that are being spewed and spread around.

 

[User1]

I have no problem with the truth, applied equally.
But it needs to start somewhere. It needs to start with the biggest impact statements.

Again there are hundreds of millions of posts per day through that platform and who is going to do the filtering and fact checking?

Who's truth? It is a messaging platform, content. Not a unbiased fact checking platform. The current news and media platforms can't even report consistently without their bias.

​

 

[Silver14SS]

Again there are hundreds of millions of posts per day through that platform and who is going to do the filtering and fact checking?

Nobody, why does the solution have to be all or nothing? I think it would be perfectly fine if all accounts verified as the leader of a country are fact checked. The leader of a country has a unique influence, I don't think everyone needs to be fact checked and I don't have a solution for how Twitter should draw their line. I believe Twitter should be allowed to make their own line though.

Who's truth? It is a messaging platform, content. Not a unbiased fact checking platform. The current news and media platforms can't even report consistently without their bias.

Hopefully they stick to verifiable facts and not opinions. My concern is an Executive Order being used to dictate Twitter's behavior, that is very frightening to me.

 

[mfinn]

Again there are hundreds of millions of posts per day through that platform and who is going to do the filtering and fact checking?
Who's truth? It is a messaging platform, content. Not a unbiased fact checking platform. The current news and media platforms can't even report consistently without their bias.

When you talk about the hundreds of millions of posts, I do understand the difficulty, but when a single person can affect millions and millions of others, with false and misleading statements, then I'm all for it.
It called personal accountibility.
This country seems to have lost it.

 

[User1]

The discussion is about Twitter attaching fact checks to the President's tweets and the political action he is proposing. I don't see a way to have this conversation without it being political.

No, I do not think Twitter should be required to fact check everyone's tweets. I do think that fact checking the President and working the way down through government is a great place to start. It doesn't have to be an all or nothing proposition.

"Now do you see the concern and problem?" Is it just the logistics of fact checking every single Tweet? If so, I don't agree it's required.

You are making it a political and/or activist platform then. As I noted above who's truth. Or to borrow FB's stance is who is to be the arbiter of truth.

I understand you are focusing on the political side but I am not.

 

[Silver14SS]

You are making it a political and/or activist platform then. As I noted above who's truth. Or to borrow FB's stance is who is to be the arbiter of truth.

I understand you are focusing on the political side but I am not.

Should Twitter be forbidden from being a "political and/or activist platform"? What's wrong with letting them do what they want with fact checks and users leaving their platform if they don't agree with it?

 

[User1]

It called personal accountibility.

Sure. Everyone should be accountable and it should be applied equally.

 

[Robert Asbury]

Except not everybody has equal influence. If someone thinks that Joe Schmoe posting scientifically false information is as dangerous as POTUS posting false information, they are kidding themselves.

 

[User1]

Should Twitter be forbidden from being a "political and/or activist platform"? What's wrong with letting them do what they want with fact checks and users leaving their platform if they don't agree with it?

Already answered. Who's truth?

Since we do not agree on "everyone" being held to the same standard do you agree it should be applied then to all three members of the legislative branch? They all use the platform. To include past members.

I see it as a bigger issue and we don't agree. All good.

 

[Twitchy]

The fact check thing was part of something Twitter introduced for all high profile accounts recently. I wouldn't be surprised if we see it on any political account that says something on the controversial side.

This order does seem at odds with letting private companies do their own thing, which is a typical GOP mainstay. So it will be interesting to see how it all unfolds.

 

[Silver14SS]

Already answered.

Will you please dumb it down for me with a Yes or No? Should Twitter be forbidden from being a "political and/or activist platform"?

I think it should be left to Twitter how to fact check or otherwise run their business. :) If Twitter wants to position themselves on one side of the political spectrum and risk alienating parts of their user base, I think they should have the opportunity to do so without the government getting involved.

 

[JasonK84]

No executive order can remove people’s rights to press, speech, and freedom of expression.

 

[Chefwheredyougo]

It shouldn't just be the "leader" that's fact checked. Because we have multiple political parties, it will always be biased. More so in this administration than any other... on both sides.

I could get behind leader"S" being fact checked. As in both sides of the spectrum. Social media is 100% biased, and nearly all of the big names are biased towards the democratic side of things. At least with the mainstream news networks there's almost a balance, Fox News or CNN.

The issue I have is that with our younger generations coming of age through social media, they will only hear what the Facebooks and Twitters think they should hear, and thus develop a political agenda based on one sides propaganda.

Granted, our POTUS does use those platforms a bit too often imo so it's easier to target him. But in this day and age our Leaders should be using whatever they can to inform their citizens. As long as it's fair and done equally to everyone in the Judicial, Legislative, and Executive branches I could care less. At the moment though, it isn't.

On the other hand though, I feel like this is targeting our freedom of speech. If they want to go after the right or left, they should be allowed to. It IS their company to do as they please with.

 

[jschultzbass]

I'm not surprised he got all upset when they attached a fact check to one of his posts on twitter.
But if he shuts it down, how will he communicate with his minions

Really? This is why we can't have political posts on R2R, you talk like that. Now people who support the president are his minions? Really? :rolleyes:

 

[jschultzbass]

The initial problem with the "fact check" is they used an obviously biased new source to "fact check". That's not fact checking it's cherry picking for political purposes. It's a private company, it can do what it wants, but why can't it also be sued? Seems fair.

 

[WVNed]

LOL.

That's why they do it. So it will be deleted. Control the narrative.

 

[Thales]

Doubtful it will have any affect at all on sites like this. Pretty sure he's just trying to get the censorship that's running rampant thru sites like Twitter, Facebook and YouTube out..

The ability for this site, and other non government sites, to censor based on whatever they like - no political or religious posts - for instance, may be effected.

 

[WVNed]

Twitter is so much easier than just buying votes with little bottles of whiskey or $10.

Those little bottles laying everywhere by the road. It was kind of funny.

 

[User1]

Will you please dumb it down for me with a Yes or No? Should Twitter be forbidden from being a "political and/or activist platform"?

I think it should be left to Twitter how to fact check or otherwise run their business. :) If Twitter wants to position themselves on one side of the political spectrum and risk alienating parts of their user base, I think they should have the opportunity to do so without the government getting involved.

Doesn't need to be dumbed down. Who's truth. You apply to all or none was my reply. Should or should not isn't applicable as state and federal government do not regulate nor mandate such platforms or business.

As I said - I stay out of the political side of things but focussing on a much broader problem with social and media bias. It hurts across the spectrum regardless of what our opinions are.

 

[CubsFan]

There are no alternative facts. There is no way this isn’t a political discussion. The president felt he was treated unfairly because playing the victim is part of his schtick. This president is the most petulant in American history. Nobody cares about every Tom dick and Harry with 17 followers on twitter and to equate them to the president of the us and his 8 zillion followers is once again some disingenuous bs that for one reason or another his followers think will fly by unnoticed.

R2R won’t be affected. This EO is based on attacking his enemies. He hates people that call out his lies.

“Who’s truth”? It’s the truth based on the laws surrounding mail in ballots. The president lied and attacked his opponents based on these ballots. A lie is a lie. It’s not someone else’s truth and to claim so should make one feel ashamed. The president shouldn’t lie to our faces and his supporters should not defend it.

Morning folks.