Former top Twitter official forced to leave home due to threats amid ‘Twitter Files’ release

Thank you for making my point. It isn’t a right-left thing. There are creeps throughout society. Rich, poor, conservative, liberal, heartland and coast.

 

And that was exactly my point. Thank you for acknowledging that this isn’t only “the left”.

 

Then why didn't you post links reflecting that?

 

Because I was responding to someone who suggested that ”the left” supported pedophiles.

 

Fair enough, but if your point was that there are pedophiles on both sides you could have been clear about it.

 

Businesses exist to make money, not push your political agenda and censor others.

 

YOU were one of the ones dismissing conservative claims of censorship calling it "fake" claims defending Twitter.

http://politicalforum.com/index.php?posts/1073384473/

http://politicalforum.com/index.php?posts/1073406116/

http://politicalforum.com/index.php?posts/1073406841/


Pull the curtain back and showcase the censorship and shakiness, and Musk becomes your enemy?

That's pretty sad man.

 

not republican businesses, it seems, many are political and want to censor others

 

I did, and I still stand by them. But what your dismissing, and glossing over is that I was asking WHY they were banned, not that they were banned. In the twitter files not once do they actually show WHY someone was banned, just that they "were" banned. That has been the problem all along. And they also claimed in files1 that both sides had an effect on the process, they curiously mention not one from the liberal side who was banned.......right. And lets be very clear here, Donald Trump was the government during this time frame, and you somehow think Joe Biden had more power over twitter ? FFS

I ALSO have said since the beginning of all of this "debate" that NOBODY has any "right" on someone else's platform. Thats like saying you have a right to the presidential podium during a press conference. And then the idea that TWITTER had an effect on the election ? C'mon man, you cannot believe that. Seriously, you CANNOT believe that Twitter effected the election ? If you or yours are getting information that they use to vote from bobthecarpenter3074 on twitter, you should have your right to vote taken away.

Now since you can show me which republicans were banned, and the total number of them, and WHY they were banned, you should easily be able to show how many Dems were banned also right ? Oh yeah, none of them are mentioned in Files2-5 ?

You're being used by Elon to forward his agenda.......

 

Yes

 

Did Twitter effect the election. Nope, not by itself.

But the heavy bias and censorship across all media platforms by hyper partisan lefties likely did.

You can't run 80% negative stories, censor support, and then pretend this influence didn't have effect.

What exactly is Elon's agenda here. Definitely curious in what you think it is.

 

They are already making the term "Groomer" or "Pedophile" a bigoted term. Meaning, your a bigot for even accusing someone who might like to noodle little boys and girls.

Rep. Katie Porter Says The Term ‘Pedophile’ Brands Someone A Criminal Because Of Their Sexual Orientation

And no Ms. Porter.... Or she/her/they... The term "Pedophile" only applies to those that think sex with underage children is okay.

 

There should be a rule against scrolling back to check the record.
It's just not fair!

 

You're just mean!

 

With all due respect (thank you for the civil debate), what “bias/censorship” are you claiming here. Do you feel that people are banned for what they say, or how they say it ?

This is exactly what I was saying about Twitter and the perceived bias in who was banned because in all of this, every story has been about someone being banned, but not WHY they were banned. We’re both conservative and liberal voices banned ? The answer is yes, but the “Files” only show one side of who was banned, and literally omit that liberals were banned.

What Elon is doing is stoking the fires of “your side is bad”, creating division because that division creates engagement for his platform. He is starting the fire, and he wants everyone to come see the fire of division on Twitter. I honestly believe for him this is purely business, and he doesn't care about the consequences, as long as the people come to twitter to argue it. HE is loosing money hand over fist on twitter right now, and he needs to do something to increase engagement, which is what drives twitters value.

 

Periodic reminder that the concept of “gender identity” was made up by a pedophile psychopath whose experiments with gender on kids resulted in total failure. His flawed and failed research and experiments formed the basis of gender ideology today. -Libs of Tic Toc

That account is no longer banned (Thanks Elon!) and they can once again reveal the truth.

 

Anytime you open up free speech, Communists, anarchists and fascists get very upset.

 

Seriously? Or was that sarcasm?

If everyone that the right and the QAnon crazies accuse of pedophilia were actually guilty, there would be no child left untouched. It's a ridiculous meme that is causing a lot of harm.

 

Got proof of any of that?

 

No compassion for pedos sorry.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/yo...akenly-blocked-upenn-website-elon-musks-tweet
You realize doctoral theses are published and you can read what Yoel Roth published at U Penn?
Ask the university's own official:
On Saturday and Sunday, Roth's dissertation was inaccessible on the University of Pennsylvania’s Scholarly Commons website, according to internet archives on Wayback Machine. A note next to the work’s title on the website during that time read, "This paper has been withdrawn."
The university told Fox News Digital in a statement that the designation was a mistake and has since been corrected.
"On December 10, access to the dissertation of University of Pennsylvania graduate Yoel Roth, Ph.D., was mistakenly closed off on Scholarly Commons, one of the two digital sites on which dissertations by Penn doctoral graduates can be publicly accessed," said Director of Media Relations Ron Ozio.
"That error triggered a pre-set statement in the vendor’s system inaccurately indicating that the paper had been withdrawn," he said. "The dissertation can now be accessed on both Scholarly Commons and ProQuest."


https://www.opindia.com/2022/10/cen...-how-twitter-refused-to-take-down-child-porn/
Mr. Roth was part of Trust and Safety.

 

I think that a select few people make decisions at our largest media conglomerates in an effort to sway public opinions to align with their agenda. From social media companies censoring heavily against one side of the political spectrum, to print, radio, and television media companies pushing narratives that support their agenda, to down right partisan fake news outlets simply telling lies.

Twitter is but one example.

If you control the narrative, the information... you control the people.



Hell, the level of bias portrayed by the media has create a whole cult of TDS suffers who think Trump is satan himself.

When looking at the overwhelming amount of evidence of anti-conservative bias, I am not sure how anybody can suggest it wasn't taking place:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-google-censored-conservatives-big-tech-suspension

https://nypost.com/2022/11/30/twitt...oring-posts-hunter-biden-scoop-was-a-mistake/

I don't think so. I think what he is doing is showcasing how entrenched this type of bias is among all media sources, using twitter as an example.

This is probably uncomfortable for those that align with the liberal political agenda, but that doesn't make it untrue.

Maybe it's a business venture and based upon revenue generation, but none of that changes the evidence.

 

But don't you think that is because Trump himself ? In other words, in the things HE says that are untrue, or that are derogatory to others. Trump has a very long history of publicly espousing negative attitudes and comments about other people, thus he created the negative environment. Trump has a VERY long history of being negative and saying disparaging things about other people in the press, and also disparaging the press as a whole. And if we are going to be honest, Trump has never had a good rapport with his own public image. I would agree with you if this started when he became president, but he has had a very long time in the public limelight, and 90% of that time has been negativity coming from him, just like he did when he became president. This relationship of hate with the press has been his doing for many years before being elected.

I would challenge this based on WHY they were "muted", which is being pushed as biased against the right. This is just like the twitter debate going on now...are they being challenged because they are conservatives, or is it because of what they actually say. I see a lot of coverage of "conservatives being banned", and not much about "what they did to get censored". Again, I go back to the Twitter files. The reports are "conservatives were muted !!!!!", but literally nothing about WHY they were muted.

He is claiming bias based on the who, not the what. Trump has verifiably lied over 30,000 times during his presidency. That has been verified by multiple sources. Now, is that muting who he is, or what he says ?

Again, we keep debating who got banned, and have literally no information about WHY they were banned. And IMHO, that is by design. The same would go for all media outlets.

It's not uncomfortable at all. I am all for stopping false/misleading/outright lies from ANY media outlet. Fox News wasn't born to combat some liberal bias, it was built to forward an agenda (Roger Ailes publicly espoused that was why they existed). But their lies the problem, which is that "news" for the right became propaganda to forward an agenda. And once that happened, anything that didn't confirm our political bias became "lies", and it wasn't until the internet gave people the ability to independently see/verify actually what happened, almost in real time, that it was actually exposed to them. Now that confirmation bias is so engrained, and people had the ability to pick and choose their sources, they only chose those sources, and here we are today with everyone deciding what its true/false based on the source they receive it from. 90% of the time we can get information directly from the source now that the world is so connected via technology. We just have to want to find the truth,

That statement is 100% true, except for the sources that still use public airwaves (which are few and far between). We did this to ourselves, but we can fix it, if we are willing to challenge ourselves to find it. Thats sad, but the only real way to fix it is some sort of fairness doctrine that requires truth in its reporting via legal recourse. Im not really sure how to do that in the short term, but I'm willing to help find a way to make it happen.

 

I don't have compassion for actual pedophiles. I'm talking about the hundreds of people that the far right is accusing of pedophilia with no facts to support it, and urging their fellow nut jobs to go out and do harm to the wrongly accused.

 

Thank you.

From your second link:

"Twitter cannot accurately detect child sexual exploitation and non-consensual nudity at scale."

That implies that their content checking algorithms lack that sophistication. In the same paragraph, the author implies that they should not have that problem, since they had no trouble removing anti-vax content.

For those unfamiliar with how such algorithms work, let me assure you that recognizing key words in a tweet is easy, but determining whether or not an embedded photo is child pornography... we aren't there yet.

They should have removed the content when the young man asked them to. Your article says nothing about why they didn't, or couldn't. Isn't it possible that there are legal restraints being used by the people who posted it? A screwed up situation, for sure, but not necessarily Ms. Gadde's fault.