GOP leader accuses Twitter of censoring conservatives, doesn't go as planned

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: TheSubversiveOne
censorship
NOUN

mass noun
1The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
‘the regulation imposes censorship on all media’

The suppression of Ingram’s tweet is censorship. Nothing and no one but Twitter has deemed her tweet worthy of hiding because it may be “potentially sensitive”.

censor
NOUN

1An official who examines books, films, news, etc. that are about to be published and suppresses any parts that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.

On page 9 we'll be debating the meaning of suppression.... well y'all will.... im outa here.

It’s censorship or it is not. Believe in free speech or don’t.

originally posted by: JasonBillung
a reply to: Alien Abduct

But, the summary of the thread is politician does something stupid, deflects, and look even stupider.

Is stupider more stupid than stupid?

originally posted by: TheSubversiveOne

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: TheSubversiveOne
censorship
NOUN

mass noun
1The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
‘the regulation imposes censorship on all media’

The suppression of Ingram’s tweet is censorship. Nothing and no one but Twitter has deemed her tweet worthy of hiding because it may be “potentially sensitive”.

censor
NOUN

1An official who examines books, films, news, etc. that are about to be published and suppresses any parts that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.

On page 9 we'll be debating the meaning of suppression.... well y'all will.... im outa here.

It’s censorship or it is not. Believe in free speech or don’t.

I know I said I was leaving, but I just get so excited when someone actually responds to me. I can't get a decent conversation anywhere lol.

Anyway, this is definitely censorship via trigger warning. The default setting should be to allow what Twitter considers sensitive and let the overly sensitive turn it off if they're scared of reading something that might hurt their tender little feelings.

I'm betting their algorithm scours conservative content looking for common terms that it then flags as sensitive.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: TheSubversiveOne

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: TheSubversiveOne
censorship
NOUN

mass noun
1The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
‘the regulation imposes censorship on all media’

The suppression of Ingram’s tweet is censorship. Nothing and no one but Twitter has deemed her tweet worthy of hiding because it may be “potentially sensitive”.

censor
NOUN

1An official who examines books, films, news, etc. that are about to be published and suppresses any parts that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.

On page 9 we'll be debating the meaning of suppression.... well y'all will.... im outa here.

It’s censorship or it is not. Believe in free speech or don’t.

I know I said I was leaving, but I just get so excited when someone actually responds to me. I can't get a decent conversation anywhere lol.

Anyway, this is definitely censorship via trigger warning. The default setting should be to allow what Twitter considers sensitive and let the overly sensitive turn it off if they're scared of reading something that might hurt their tender little feelings.

I'm betting their algorithm scours conservative content looking for common terms that it then flags as sensitive.

The censorship is obvious. Twitter, or at least their algorithms, pore through data deeming some of it “potentially sensitive”. All censors have done the same thing to one degree or another.

Do you know if the setting is on by default? I don’t twitter.

a reply to: TheSubversiveOne

You have to go into the settings and switch it to allow the sensitive stuff.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I really don't care what the usual peanut gallery thinks, tbh. I'm already well aware they will distort this to either deflect away from McCarthy acting a fool or attempt to make this a thread to whine about Twitter. Oh and I guess xuen is going to attempt to claim the story is fake news while not following any provided links in the thread to see if that is true.

And no one really cares about the fact that many people are not sophisticated enough to even maneuver around social media. Your attempt at humiliating a conservative who objects to the cowardly policy of censorship by facebook, twitter and others is lame, to put it mildly. What is important is the fact that Facebook, Twitter, google and others are cowards -- they do not have either the moral high ground nor do they have valid political or social issue arguments that they are confident in. If they have valid ideas and were not afraid, they wouldn't censor, they would debate and offer opposing information. But the fact is...THEY ARE AFRAID...and are resorting to cowardly tactics.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
The real irony here is the President's account is exactly the type of content Twitter is targeting to censor. They did deactivate his govt account at one point. Did a judge order his account be activated again citing the first amendment? Hmmmm.

That was a random employee who was leaving the company anyways. Twitter opened the account back up as soon as they figured out what he did.

Twitter even went as far as to rewrite their terms and conditions specifically so they could have an excuse to not kick Trump off their platform as he constantly goes against their rules.

Twitter is a huge supporter of the hard right.

originally posted by: Visiting ESB
And no one really cares about the fact that many people are not sophisticated enough to even maneuver around social media.

I do, I like when politicians make bigger asses out of themselves. I'm starting to think some of these dinosaurs never even saw fire and that there would be a high probability, once you gave it to them, that they'd light their hair up through sheer stupidity.

So I'm all for giving them fire. Very hot fire.

a reply to: Visiting ESB

How is something censored if all you have to do is click an additional link to look at it? Do you get all bent out of shape when a porn site asks for your age before entering? You don't think that question has ever actually stopped anyone underage from getting onto those websites do you?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Do you get all bent out of shape when a porn site asks for your age before entering?

That is SO annoying, it's like when the liquor sites ask if I'm 21. We'll yeah, duh, chronologically I am.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Don't you just punch the bouncer at the bar when he cards you before walking in? I mean CLEARLY having to show ID is censorship and he is censoring your right to patron that bar.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Don't you just punch the bouncer at the bar when he cards you before walking in? I mean CLEARLY having to show ID is censorship and he is censoring your right to patron that bar.

I just use my numbchucks since I have mad skills.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oh goodness, you're not this dense. By default twitter enables the sensitive content filter (for good reason, it filters porn, gruesome violence, excessive profanity, and other things that the average user doesn't want appearing in their feed). Twitter then labels conservative content as sensitive to prevent people from seeing it. It's an obvious abuse of power meant to censor ideas they don't agree with (conservatives). They've admitted to doing this and much more to conservatives.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Are you saying it's not censoring if you can somehow access the material through further effort? So when they put black bars across a nude woman's chest on the front of a magazine, that's not censoring because if you go to a page in the magazine, you can indeed see her entire breasts?

Even more importantly, do you agree that conservative viewpoints should be censored like a nude magazine cover?

a reply to: Dfairlite

Oh goodness. I don't care what Twitter's motivations for hiding content behind sensitive content warnings. It isn't censorship and it is easy to change the setting that hides it.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Are you saying it's not censoring if you can somehow access the material through further effort? So when they put black bars across a nude woman's chest on the front of a magazine, that's not censoring because if you go to a page in the magazine, you can indeed see her entire breasts?

That isn't the same thing. The picture with the black bar over the breasts IS censored. I cannot remove that bar from the picture no matter what I do. I'd tear the picture first. The picture without the bar is uncensored. Neither of these situations is the same as hiding something behind a content warning.

Even more importantly, do you agree that conservative viewpoints should be censored like a nude magazine cover?

False equivalency. I don't believe that this content warning is censorship.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

What we are seeing is people trying to create an act that is said to step on their rights and naming it "censorship by laziness".

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Dfairlite

Oh goodness. I don't care what Twitter's motivations for hiding content behind sensitive content warnings. It isn't censorship and it is easy to change the setting that hides it.

It is censorship. They are literally hiding content they deem “potentially sensitive”.

Censorship by filter. Hmmm. Get rid of it.

That way we could have ads and random web page redirects with people being mutilated, killed, child pron, blood and guts, etc.

Otherwise someone put that info out for others to see but a filter stopped it. (censored it).

a reply to: TheSubversiveOne

Well take offense to it then. Pretend like your persecution complex is being fulfilled ALL because you have to click an extra link or enable a setting to see the content. Me. I think the whole issue is ridiculous because if you really cared you wouldn't be using Twitter on principle. I don't use Twitter. It's not that hard and something like this wouldn't even make me doubt using it if I did use it.