It's only NSFW due to language. This guy has a great "theory" on platforms like Twitter shutting down tweets that don't fit their views.
Not Work Safe Social Media Fucking With Us
- Thread starter RackMaster
- Start date
Mind blowing? It honestly explains a lot.
So who follows The Donald? Honestly, the attention his tweets generate, it's like watching a cattle dog chase a ball. It's no different from the above. Used to have SOCMED accounts, no longer.
I went and got fitted fords very nice tin foil fedora today, very classy.
Seriously though this video raised some very interesting questions for me (if true).
I don't tweet, but over time I've noticed some odd things happening on Photobucket and Facebook. I've had some pretty innocent gun/military photos deleted from both for not complying with site standards, or some such bullshit...and later restored but only after a complaint.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the theory in the OP is true.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the theory in the OP is true.
R.Caerbannog
Verified Military
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,106
Eh, 99.9% of social media is garbage anyways. Exempting the goodness that is Shadowspear and a few other niche sites, the information put out on social media, is worth less than a bag of rabbit droppings.
Sure, but that's not really the discussion.
While the information might be garbage, the surreptitious censoring of that garbage to fulfill a narrative (from whomever) is what we are discussing here.
R.Caerbannog
Verified Military
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,106
Your right. I just think that false information regardless of narrative, is still false information. If people are getting their news from the garbage, we've really devolved as a society. Hence, why people quit or back away from social media.
It's more than sourcing information off them. It's them limiting the reach of your opinion because it is not the same as the platform owners.
It's them deciding what news (fake or not) is important, without your input.
policemedic
Verified SWAT
That opens the issue of whether a private site owner--even a corporate one like Twitter--has the right to censor posts or content that don't align with its corporate positions. The answer is yes, though I believe it's bullshit and dishonest when they do it.
*Admin Edit*
Have a great night all, great discussion here!
Have a great night all, great discussion here!
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't know if it's a late night (vs an early morning) where you are, but this post might be the sign of 'time to stop posting'.
Last edited:
Don't know if it's a late night (vs an early morning) where you are, but this post might be the sign of 'time to stop posting'. Just saying.
But yet you trap me into a post, that means nothing... thank you and yes, good morning....asshole who looKS at clocks...
Yes, last post!
Blizzard
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2012
- Messages
- 3,241
Social media companies, like Twitter and Facebook, provide a public vehicle for delivering messages. Anyone with the required technology can use their product. Is the company liable/legally culpable for the content of a user's message? No, the company is not responsible for the user's message. So, why would a social media company need to monitor and/or censor content, provided the content is not breaking any law? It doesn't need to and shouldn't.
These companies have the right to protect their proprietary code that powers their product but, unless a warrant is issued/laws are broken, users should have an expectation of privacy, not unlike a phone conversation between two persons (text messages have similar protection and assumption of privacy). It's all about data mining for the company.
So, as far as I'm concerned, Twitter, Facebook, and all these companies can gnaw an engorged tick off a donkey's anus. If they can't handle free speech, then get out of the communications/social media business.
TLDR20
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 6,112
You sign a user agreement before using any of these sites. They have a right to use your shit, delete anything they want, or ban prevent you from registering.
This site has a similar user agreement....
policemedic
Verified SWAT
Think what you like, but you really should read the terms of service you agree to and things like the Twitter Rules and the Facebook equivalent. Private platforms have no duty to protect your right to say whatever you like. If the government ever opens a Twitter-like site, feel free to get your 1st Amendment on at that site, because the government is required to protect your right to free speech (though remember, not all speech is protected).
By the way, do you seriously think you have an expectation to privacy in something that you have posted on a worldwide site that has policies--which you have agreed to--that gives them the right to share your content very, very broadly? I am very circumspect in what my company Tweets or what I say on FB precisely because I am acutely aware there is no such thing as expectation of privacy in those settings.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 12,523
Not to pile on, but you said it right here. "Business". Twitter/Facebook/Etc are in business to make money. They are finally at a point where they are figuring out how to do so (Facebook more than Twitter) and I've long believed that the topics these sites prune, edit, hide, etc. have more to do with preventing their getting sued or being accused of supporting racism/hate than any agenda of ownership.
I highly doubt that, then they would have to equally remove racist/hate from all views and frankly that doesn't happen.
