SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Twitter adds label to Trump's misleading tweets about mail-in ballots:
Twitter said Tuesday that it added a label to President Donald Trump's tweets for containing "potentially misleading information about voting processes," a rare move that shows the social media company is taking a tougher stance against misinformation.
It's the first time that Twitter has displayed a label on Trump's tweets.
On Tuesday, Trump tweeted that "There is NO WAY (ZERO!) that Mail-in-Ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent," a claim that has been debunked by fact-checkers and news organizations. He continues his remarks in another tweet, stating that it will be a "Rigged election."
A label appears under both tweets that states "Get the facts about mail-in ballots." Clicking on the warning notice directs users to a page that states that fact-checkers say there isn't any evidence that mail-in ballots are linked to voter fraud. Trump also falsely states in the tweets that California will send mail-in ballots to "anyone living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there" when only registered voters will receive ballots. States such as Oregon, Utah and Washington have long conducted elections by mail only, while states such as Nebraska allow any voter to request a ballot and vote by mail without having to provide a reason.
A Twitter spokeswoman said in a statement that the decision is in line with how the company approaches misinformation on its site, which includes adding warning notices and labels depending on the likelihood and severity of harm a tweet could cause.
Twitter's actions against Trump's tweets will also likely increase tensions between the company and conservative users, who allege that the social network suppresses their speech. Twitter has repeatedly denied those allegations. Earlier this month, Trump tweeted that the "Radical Left" is in control of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Google and said his administration is working on a solution.
In two tweets, Trump accused Twitter of interfering in the 2020 US presidential election.
"Twitter is completely stifling FREE SPEECH, and I, as President, will not allow it to happen!," he tweeted.
Also at BBC News, Ars Technica, MIT Technology Review
(Score: 3, Insightful) by meustrus on Wednesday May 27 2020, @05:52PM (8 children)
If you provide only one example, then there is only one example. It's your responsibility, not anybody else's, to collect facts supporting your own argument.
It's unfortunate that the "default skeptical reaction" so often applies only to so-called mainstream media, and is not employed for partisan content one wants to agree with. "Fair and balanced" my ass.
The correct reaction to discovering that everyone has a perspective that can bias their reporting is to insist on facts. If anybody fails to adequately support their own argument, it probably means they haven't even properly investigated it for themselves. It's not your responsibility to collect their facts for them.
The worst thing you can do, though, is scramble about looking for somebody else to trust. Did you learn nothing from discovering CNN's media bias? Why would you think that any cable network is better? Why would you think somebody on the internet is more trustworthy? Just because the left lies sometimes doesn't mean the right never lies ever.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Wednesday May 27 2020, @06:10PM (7 children)
Sorry, this is a total cop out. If you want to pretend to be blind it's on you, but here some things to consider: Yellow cake. Russiagate (including the Flynn debacle). The differences in how sexual assault claims are treated when the target is a Democrat like Biden.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by meustrus on Wednesday May 27 2020, @07:07PM (5 children)
You're not sorry, but I get it. It's much easier to see the flaws in our opponents than it is to see the flaws in ourselves.
I'm not here to tell you that you're wrong. I'm here to tell you that other people are just as skeptical as you are.
When you see some people accept lies and half-truths from the New York Times, it's not that those people are incapable of skepticism. They are plenty skeptical of Fox News and the like. They just have a blind spot for people telling them what they want to hear.
Similarly, when you hear lies and half-truths from Fox News, you should pretend that it came from the New York Times. Apply your "default skeptical reaction" to everything, not just the news sources you have caught saying lies you don't like.
To come back around to my first point, though, it's important how you talk about these things. Don't just assume people know about "yellowcake". You have to go through the motions of relaying the facts yourself. Sometimes, you will find that the narrative you've adopted doesn't quite fit together. It's happened to me a few times that I didn't know I was wrong until I tried to convince someone else I was right.
The last thing any of us should want is for ideology to be more important than the facts. The facts are the only thing that you and I can both look at and agree on. They're the things that make your opponents squirm when they hear them. Use that. Stop trying to turn every argument into some post-modern bullshit about how there is no truth, so the only thing you can do is attack the liars. All that accomplishes is everyone involved believing they were right and everyone else is an idiot.
We all surround ourselves with information that supports our existing worldview. Google and social media do that to us now, too. It's entirely possible that if I search for something, I won't find the facts, because all my friends and Google search results have a particular bias. That's why it's especially important to make a complete and compelling argument to everyone you're talking to. You can't assume they can find the facts anywhere else.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2, Touché) by hemocyanin on Wednesday May 27 2020, @08:47PM (4 children)
You presume SN is a place for discussion. It has devolved into a downmod hoard of Democrat partisans who have no interest in discussion because everyone else, even other liberals like me, is a literal nazi. They can take those terms and RTFG (because of course they wouldn't use DDG) but to hell with putting in any effort for them.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 27 2020, @08:55PM (1 child)
Do you even listen to yourself?
I call straight up bullshit on your "liberal" identity. You are only ever harping on the liberals around here while there is plenty of conservative bullshit for you to bite into.
Get fucked asshole, YOU are the type of partisan fuckwad you are angry about but it is never a YOU problem. Gaslight Obstruct Project! Snowflake whiner.
(Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Thursday May 28 2020, @10:09PM
You confuse (or conflate) liberal with Democrat.
Democrats are the avowed enemy of liberals. Not by words of course, but by their deeds they are known.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 27 2020, @10:01PM
Worse: Their goal is to prevent other people from seeing what someone else wrote, because the default squelch is +1.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2020, @08:26AM
Any yet this is about the 10th time you've said that - on this thread.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 27 2020, @07:09PM
You act as though it is only the Left that is treating sexual assault differently when it is done by the Left.
Don't attempt to claim that the Right did not do the exact same thing when the shoe was on the other foot.
You will need to bring up something that actually distinguishes the two sides to have an argument for one or the other.