X slapped a “warning” on links to NPR’s follow-up reporting on the Trump campaign’s altercation in Arlington National Cemetery, suggesting the link is “unsafe.”
It's interesting that they are choosing this, of all things, to double down on. They're not just contesting what happened at the event, but doing it in a confrontational fashion that guarantees it will remain a story long after the rest of us move on. It would be one thing to simply say "We had a discussion over this, We're right, they're wrong". But they keep pushing it.
How many NPR fans are on Twitter these days, anyway? If Twitter had not chosen to step in and falsely label this story, it might have gotten 10 click-throughs and that's it. But now, it's an actual story, it remains in the news, and I'm not sure if that's positive for the Trump campaign.
I know, it's just what they do. It's the crowd size thing, the Sharpie thing, the "alternative facts" all over again. My hope is that every time they push their false reality too far, a handful of voters realize what is happening, and it prevents them from gaining more power.
How many NPR fans are on Twitter these days, anyway? If Twitter had not chosen to step in and falsely label this story, it might have gotten 10 click-throughs and that’s it. But now, it’s an actual story, it remains in the news, and I’m not sure if that’s positive for the Trump campaign.
This is an interesting thought. Is Twitter now useful exclusively as a Streisand-Effect machine?
Oh, he's for sure testing the waters on this relatively small event. Throw the spam tag on and see what happens. If not much happens, I guarantee you will be seeing it more on factual reported events.
If there is a big uproar? Oops, our algorithm was malfunctioning.
Because this looks really fucking bad. Like even by Trump standards. They know that their best hope is turning this into another heated alternative facts culture war issue.
They do this not because they think it will actually change minds, but because it makes talking about "the most recent crazy thing Trump did" a "political statement" which means people can't bring it up at work or around certain family, etc. If they turn it into a political third rail it prevents people from talking about it.
guarantees it will remain a story long after the rest of us move on.
A story where? On twitter where it is marked as unsafe and full of lies?
This is not the streisand effect. This is demonstrating the power of literally controlling the media to a degree that even rupert murdock gets envious of. Because if your news channel is spewing garbage? Other news channels and "grass roots" efforts will correct it. But if the platform they use to correct it is the thing that is compromised?
Shit like this? The trump story (that was never going to get traction) is irrelevant. What is relevant is musk and his handlers advertising what twitter can do and how long twitter is willing to "hold out" to regulation attempts.
It is the same logic behind apple making it clear they will resist information requests until there is a court order or Proton outright telling its users what it will and won't give law enforcement and governments. Except this is marketing toward those governments, not the users.
How many NPR fans are on Twitter these days, anyway?
I'd say, probably a whole fucking lot? Normal people listen to NPR, and (unfortunately), "normal" people still use Twitter. There is definitely a massive overlap still.
its easy when you don't have any managing to do. the dude's effectively unemployed. truly a testament to the real value that CEOs add to the economy. zero, if not less.
The worst fucking part is that NPR has reacted to this shit by over-correcting and becoming obviously right-leaning in their reporting on US news. It's a fucking joke. I guess all it takes to stop press from being "free" is a bunch of violent assholes willing to threaten to rape you family. Who would've thought.
This isn't exactly the same because the Arlington incident actually happened and has some bearing on an ongoing political campaign as opposed to being pure speculation and misinformation.
So Elon is purposely curating content on the platform? Isn't that a violation of section 230? They should lose that protection if they are actively blocking free speech and marking news as spam.
It's the argument a lot of politicians are making, that once platforms start curating user generated content they become responsible for it despite section 230. I think it's bullshit, but it is the argument being made.
Dumping Twitter wasn't even a slight wrench. It descended into the toilet pretty quickly after Musk took over. I occasionally sneak back to Reddit, although the experience isn't that great. But Twitter? Nopes from me even though I liked it previously very much.