zlacker

[return to "The Twitter Files, Part Six"]
1. paulpa+34[view] [source] 2022-12-16 21:46:01
>>GavCo+(OP)
3. Twitter’s contact with the FBI was constant and pervasive, as if it were a subsidiary.

4. Between January 2020 and November 2022, there were over 150 emails between the FBI and former Twitter Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth.

How is this constant? This is just 1 request every 7 days . I figured it would be more. Also, it's called the FBI. Their job is to investigate federal matters, which includes content on social social media. They do with with all major social networks. It's not just politics or the media, but things related to safety, terrorism, kidnaping, child exploitation, etc.

It seems like these files are becoming more and more underwhelming.

◧◩
2. diob+dN[view] [source] 2022-12-17 02:28:48
>>paulpa+34
Wait till folks realize how much contact government agencies have with nearly every company (leaking stories, spin, etc.).

It's weird that it's turned into some sort of naive left vs right issue.

I'd be asking what the goal is, but apparently it's that. Point fingers, suggest no solutions beyond vote for us.

◧◩◪
3. roenxi+g01[view] [source] 2022-12-17 04:05:31
>>diob+dN
It would be foolish to see this as a left v. right issue. This is an authoritarian vs. libertarian battle.

This sort of activity is what the government 100% shouldn't be involved in. Having a department of What is Allowed To Be Said is one of those ideas that gets tried regularly and has a terrible track record that - inevitably - ranges between a source of mild shame in hindsight to a nightmare influence on society.

There are nearly no scenarios where it is acceptable for the FBI to be in regular contact with Twitter asking for Tweets to be taken down, and if there are it should be transparent and documented - in public, in real time. It shouldn't take Elon Musk spending too much money to get details on the FBI's censorship programs (similarly it should have taken Assange-Manning-Snowden to get details on the pervasive spying).

◧◩◪◨
4. andirk+9e1[view] [source] 2022-12-17 06:27:10
>>roenxi+g01
The stupid H Biden lap top story shows that factually the government can twist a private company's arm outside of legal channels and said company will do as it is told. That is very bad. I'm not sure people realize this. Every incriminating leak showcases it more and more and yet people are generally not worried about it because they themselves have not been affected. Yet.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. acdha+Ss2[view] [source] 2022-12-17 17:43:45
>>andirk+9e1
Can you point to exactly where the government twisted arms? What Taibi published showed the opposite.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. andirk+p93[view] [source] 2022-12-17 22:08:33
>>acdha+Ss2
We learned before Taibbi's scoop that Twitter disallowed sharing of the story including in DMs. Blocking content in DMs was supposedly only used for illicit underage material until that story. Facebook's Zuck outright admitted in plain English that they got contacted by the government (maybe FBI, can't remember) so they buried the story. This is not my opinion or guessing. We know this to be absolute fact.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. acdha+tg3[view] [source] 2022-12-17 23:05:27
>>andirk+p93
> We learned before Taibbi's scoop that Twitter disallowed sharing of the story including in DMs. Blocking content in DMs was supposedly only used for illicit underage material until that story

You might not have been aware of that but it was common knowledge years before. During the hours when that story was blocked using the same mechanism they used for other hacked materials like you might have seen if some celebrity’s nudes had been leaked. Within a day that was removed for the NY Post news story since they were individually taking down the tweets with the actual nudes.

> This is not my opinion or guessing. We know this to be absolute fact.

What we know as absolute fact is that you’re getting your information from people who carefully lie to you, and you didn’t verify the source. It sounds like you’re referring to Zuckerberg’s interview with Rogan, where he said this:

“The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."

That’s important because what he said doesn’t support that narrative:

Rogan: “Did [the FBI] specifically say you need to be on guard about that story?”

Zuckerberg: “No, I don’t remember if it was that specifically, but it basically fit the pattern.”

https://nypost.com/2022/08/25/mark-zuckerberg-criticizes-twi...

Now, this is all off topic from the “Twitter Files” but again it’s important to remember that the mythology around conservative oppression is being used to distract from the real point that the laptop story failed to have the impact Giuliani & Trump wanted was because there wasn’t much of substance there and the evidence was tainted by sloppy handling. They’re trying to market it as a tale of censorship because they know that it wasn’t effective as a scandal.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. andirk+Po3[view] [source] 2022-12-18 00:18:23
>>acdha+tg3
It's common knowledge yet here we are arguing whether these social media outlets block useless content that happens to be embarrassing to the State when suggested to by the FBI. You seem to agree with this but frame it as a counterpoint. "Mythology around conservative oppression"? I don't follow conservative whinings about how their hate speech is oppressed.
[go to top]