Eegore wrote on 11/01/22 at 13:27:38: I think a large part of the problem is equating social media posts and shares with actual evidence and information.
Social media is not news, or verified research on pretty much any topic. It's just an avenue for anyone to post things for everyone else to see using a private business's tools. That's it.
Twitter isn't a public forum where people should be going to learn about political policy, law, or how they should vote in an election, but they do anyway. Also the international infiltration is pretty thorough, like the Iran accounts. So Twitter does have a certain responsibility to mitigate some of the damage that can be done, and they do not have to use the government to do that. However since they are a private company, if they choose to, that is their privilege.
Now that being said, the fact that I can acknowledge private ownership in the US is not equal to me being "excited" about what every private owner does with everything they own.
Why shouldn't Twitter, or any private company, have the choice to work with the US Government?
You’re missing something Eegore. The reality is Twitter has a tremendous reach and influence. If it didn’t, we wouldn’t object when China censors info on Twitter from its people. Yes, Twitter is a private company but we have all sorts of laws regulating private companies when their influence becomes so large. We prevent large companies from merging because the stranglehold on the market would damage society. Why did we break up Ma Bell all those years ago?
The issue is a law enforcement department, the FBI, used the fear of retribution from them, and asked Twitter (and mostly Facebook) to withhold information that some analysts say changed the course of the 2020 election. That’s wrong.
Pages: 
