I am disgusted by disingenuous, manipulative articles like this one concerning "free speech," Twitter, and Elon Musk ...

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,196
7,790
1
This Market Watch article uses statements like the one below (in red) to misinform people about the objection of Elon Musk and other conservatives. Notice that this statement does not include "banning viewpoints they do not like." No where in the article is this even mentioned. Instead, the article used a statement like the one below more than once in an obvious attempt to mischaracterize Elon Musk's motives:

"What does ‘free speech’ actually mean? Twitter isn’t censoring speech, despite what Elon Musk and many users think"​

within the article ...

" ... Twitter and YouTube can pull down content that they consider obscene, inciting violence or spreading misinformation. And banning them from moderating that content on their own sites would ban their First Amendment rights..."

This is an unbelievably sly method that seems to work on a rather ignorant public.

It is sad that even a business site like MarketWatch has to appease its leftwing hierarchy with an article that is, in short, delivering a false narrative. What could be so critical to them as to deceive and manipulate?
 

LionDeNittany

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
44,714
18,447
1
DFW, TX
This Market Watch article uses statements like the one below (in red) to misinform people about the objection of Elon Musk and other conservatives. Notice that this statement does not include "banning viewpoints they do not like." No where in the article is this even mentioned. Instead, the article used a statement like the one below more than once in an obvious attempt to mischaracterize Elon Musk's motives:

"What does ‘free speech’ actually mean? Twitter isn’t censoring speech, despite what Elon Musk and many users think"​

within the article ...

" ... Twitter and YouTube can pull down content that they consider obscene, inciting violence or spreading misinformation. And banning them from moderating that content on their own sites would ban their First Amendment rights..."

This is an unbelievably sly method that seems to work on a rather ignorant public.

It is sad that even a business site like MarketWatch has to appease its leftwing hierarchy with an article that is, in short, delivering a false narrative. What could be so critical to them as to deceive and manipulate?

I read a Bloomberg article this week about how bad it would be to have a billionaire control Twitter because of the media control.

Within that article it mentioned a possible exodus of black users because of hate.

Bloomberg himself controls media and also was a Mayor.

It's sad.

LdN
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,931
25,729
1
An altered state
I read a Bloomberg article this week about how bad it would be to have a billionaire control Twitter because of the media control.

Within that article it mentioned a possible exodus of black users because of hate.

Bloomberg himself controls media and also was a Mayor.

It's sad.

LdN
Bloomberg= multibillionaire with massive media biz.
Zuckerberg= multibillionaire with massive media biz.
Bezos= multibillionaire with massive WaPo media inlfuencing biz.
Sulzberger family owns the NYT valued at over a billion.

All libs. Not a word said about them.
 

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
11,076
5,471
1
This Market Watch article uses statements like the one below (in red) to misinform people about the objection of Elon Musk and other conservatives. Notice that this statement does not include "banning viewpoints they do not like." No where in the article is this even mentioned. Instead, the article used a statement like the one below more than once in an obvious attempt to mischaracterize Elon Musk's motives:

"What does ‘free speech’ actually mean? Twitter isn’t censoring speech, despite what Elon Musk and many users think"​

within the article ...

" ... Twitter and YouTube can pull down content that they consider obscene, inciting violence or spreading misinformation. And banning them from moderating that content on their own sites would ban their First Amendment rights..."

This is an unbelievably sly method that seems to work on a rather ignorant public.

It is sad that even a business site like MarketWatch has to appease its leftwing hierarchy with an article that is, in short, delivering a false narrative. What could be so critical to them as to deceive and manipulate?

Let me get this straight - it’s okay for a Christian baker to deny service to a gay couple and it’s okay for Rivals to have moderators that ban people or delete posts, but it isn’t okay for Twitter to have any control over the people it allows to post on its platform or allowed to filter out bad shit?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NJPSU

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,196
7,790
1
Let me get this straight - it’s okay for a Christian baker to deny service to a gay couple and it’s okay for Rivals to have moderators that ban people or delete posts, but it isn’t okay for Twitter to have any control over the people it allows to post on its platform or allowed to filter out bad shit?

Not the point of my post. My post was about misrepresenting Elon Musk. My post was about effectively lying in an article read broadly by the general public by using Elon Musk's name but not presenting Elon Musk's argument. I am against deception. How about you?

Are you high again tonight?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sullivan and royboy

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2002
40,080
10,613
1
SE PA
What could be so critical to them as to deceive and manipulate?
An upcoming election where they are significantly out polled by conservatives. Their only way to winning is to deceive the public and try as hard as they can to ensure their competition does not get any air time to present the FACTs and their views.

All facts that do not support the left-wing’s agenda MUST be either suppressed or convincingly labeled as mis-information. And any disagreement with them MUST be labeled as racist, misogynistic, privileged white male culture or some other equivalently “triggering” left-wing phantom.
 

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
42,557
14,570
1
Let me get this straight - it’s okay for a Christian baker to deny service to a gay couple and it’s okay for Rivals to have moderators that ban people or delete posts, but it isn’t okay for Twitter to have any control over the people it allows to post on its platform or allowed to filter out bad shit?
Yep Hotshoe wouldn’t even allow us to refer to Trump as Der Fuhrer. Then he cries about free speech on Twitter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaoliLion

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
42,557
14,570
1
An upcoming election where they are significantly out polled by conservatives. Their only way to winning is to deceive the public and try as hard as they can to ensure their competition does not get any air time to present the FACTs and their views.

All facts that do not support the left-wing’s agenda MUST be either suppressed or convincingly labeled as mis-information.
If you think Twitter doesn’t currently have right wing views you simply don’t use the platform.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: psuted

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2002
40,080
10,613
1
SE PA
If you think Twitter doesn’t currently have right wing views you simply don’t use the platform.
Yeah, and they are all labeled, by Twitter, as mis-information or racist or misogynistic or white privileged or …

I would really like to know how it is that Free Speech is only a construct of White Male Privilege.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psuted

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
42,557
14,570
1
Yeah, and they are all labeled, by Twitter, as mis-information or racist or misogynistic or white privileged or …

I would really like to know how it is that Free Speech is White Male Privilege.
Again that’s absolutely not true. Do you even have a Twitter account? Heres a random Tucker tweet. There are thousands.

 

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
42,557
14,570
1
Still whining like a child.
You have to admit you had no idea how a mod was supposed to behave. Do you notice that we don’t even know who the mods are now because they stay behind the scenes and act professionally?
 

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2002
40,080
10,613
1
SE PA
Here’s Sean Hannity. Where is the label you mentioned?

Another innocuous tweet. Now go find one that talks about mask mandates being ineffective and references studies to back it up. Or that the vaccines have serious side effects. Especially from one yr ago. Or maybe one about Hunter Biden from 18 months ago. Or about CRT in schools. Or …
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

mijowe

Well-Known Member
Aug 6, 2021
271
100
1
Not the point of my post. My post was about misrepresenting Elon Musk. My post was about effectively lying in an article read broadly by the general public by using Elon Musk's name but not presenting Elon Musk's argument. I am against deception. How about you?

Are you high again tonight?
I'm glad I live in a country where we have sites like the MarketWatch that allow it's writers to misrepresent Elon Musk. We can only hope for a better day when Elon Musk will allow freedom-loving Americans to misrepresent him on twitter as well!
 

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
24,990
40,478
1
You have to admit you had no idea how a mod was supposed to behave. Do you notice that we don’t even know who the mods are now because they stay behind the scenes and act professionally?
You have no idea what takes place whatsoever. You never have. You just whine like a child.
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,931
25,729
1
An altered state
You can see the tactics of the Left in this thread. By attempting to divert the content @PaoliLion actually confirmed the point I was making. He and others like him are the problem. They are blocking free speech by trying to muddy speech with nonsense.
I have been complaining for years about progs like Paolilion, Catch, Jersey boy and others hijack threads and take them off topic. And how fools play along with them. Sad.😩
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski and psuted

ao5884

Well-Known Member
Oct 1, 2019
6,688
6,400
1
This Market Watch article uses statements like the one below (in red) to misinform people about the objection of Elon Musk and other conservatives. Notice that this statement does not include "banning viewpoints they do not like." No where in the article is this even mentioned. Instead, the article used a statement like the one below more than once in an obvious attempt to mischaracterize Elon Musk's motives:

"What does ‘free speech’ actually mean? Twitter isn’t censoring speech, despite what Elon Musk and many users think"​

within the article ...

" ... Twitter and YouTube can pull down content that they consider obscene, inciting violence or spreading misinformation. And banning them from moderating that content on their own sites would ban their First Amendment rights..."

This is an unbelievably sly method that seems to work on a rather ignorant public.

It is sad that even a business site like MarketWatch has to appease its leftwing hierarchy with an article that is, in short, delivering a false narrative. What could be so critical to them as to deceive and manipulate?
It goes beyond that....social media doesn't care about misinformation...they care about misinformation from certain sources
For example. Everytime you see some post on social media that Trp called white supremacists very fine people that is in fact misinformation because that is not what he said. Yet that is OK to post on most platforms. This is why Twitter should have lost section 230 protections.
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,196
7,790
1
It goes beyond that....social media doesn't care about misinformation...they care about misinformation from certain sources
For example. Everytime you see some post on social media that Trp called white supremacists very fine people that is in fact misinformation because that is not what he said. Yet that is OK to post on most platforms. This is why Twitter should have lost section 230 protections.

Just watch. Once Twitter becomes balanced they will take away section 230 just to harass it. Then they will use the Ministry of Truth to take the place of what they had with Twitter.

Really dirty stuff going on. No one in government or on the Left wants to debate issues any more. They are in full blown silence-them mode.
 

ao5884

Well-Known Member
Oct 1, 2019
6,688
6,400
1
Just watch. Once Twitter becomes balanced they will take away section 230 just to harass it. Then they will use the Ministry of Truth to take the place of what they had with Twitter.

Really dirty stuff going on. No one in government or on the Left wants to debate issues any more. They are in full blown silence-them mode.
All else aside if an individual isn't concerned about what Biden wants to create is either a very stupid or likes oppressive regimes.
 

Jerry

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
4,451
9,369
1
Let me get this straight - it’s okay for a Christian baker to deny service to a gay couple and it’s okay for Rivals to have moderators that ban people or delete posts, but it isn’t okay for Twitter to have any control over the people it allows to post on its platform or allowed to filter out bad shit?

Let me get this straight: It's OK for a rich company to control the flow of information and punish people for dissenting views...because...it's a private company, not the government...but it's not OK for a poor Christian bakery to exercise religious freedom in the sale of wedding cakes...because...well, never mind.

Anyone who can't see what the Regime is doing here must be an idiot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski and psuted

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
11,076
5,471
1
Let me get this straight: It's OK for a rich company to control the flow of information and punish people for dissenting views...because...it's a private company, not the government...but it's not OK for a poor Christian bakery to exercise religious freedom in the sale of wedding cakes...because...well, never mind.

Anyone who can't see what the Regime is doing here must be an idiot.

Moderators ban people on this board all the time. What’s different?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NJPSU

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
42,557
14,570
1
Just watch. Once Twitter becomes balanced they will take away section 230 just to harass it. Then they will use the Ministry of Truth to take the place of what they had with Twitter.

Really dirty stuff going on. No one in government or on the Left wants to debate issues any more. They are in full blown silence-them mode.
Another person who doesn’t actually use Twitter. There are right wingers and right wing ideology all over Twitter currently.
 

BW Lion

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
5,037
6,119
1
It’s not difficult to connect the dots and see where this ends up

1. Musk may or may not end up acquiring Twitter. I suspect Obama is going to sic the SEC against him to the point he withdraws his offer. It will probably be associated with something he said relative to Tesla.

2. Even if Musk is able to gain control of Twitter, the newly founded Dept of Truth will have preferential filtration capabilities over anything posted on Twitter. Any disgruntled Twitter employees will now simply go work for the Truth Ministry.

3. Twitter becomes so “moderated” by MiniTru, that people stop using it. MiniTru (Obama) wins.
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,196
7,790
1
Another person who doesn’t actually use Twitter. There are right wingers and right wing ideology all over Twitter currently.

Why do you keep going with this? No one denies that Twitter has right wingers on its platform. What we object to is that when it really counts, such as exposing crimes by the Biden Family before an election, Twitter has taken a side to thwart free speech that it feels is a threat to the political outcome they want. In that sense they are not a platform. They are a publisher.

Twitter was part of an effective media strategy that successfully threw the last election. Twitter's employees would not be in full meltdown mode right now if they were what they advertise. They realize that they will become powerless. They will become nothing but paper and pencil instead of the story.

You are not fooling anyone by making constant Straw Man arguments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski and summitlion1

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,931
25,729
1
An altered state
Why do you keep going with this? No one denies that Twitter has right wingers on its platform. What we object to is that when it really counts, such as exposing crimes by the Biden Family before an election, Twitter has taken a side to thwart free speech that it feels is a threat to the political outcome they want. In that sense they are not a platform. They are a publisher.

Twitter was part of an effective media strategy that successfully threw the last election. Twitter's employees would not be in full meltdown mode right now if they were what they advertise. They realize that they will become powerless. They will become nothing but paper and pencil instead of the story.

You are not fooling anyone by making constant Straw Man arguments.
Because he is a troll. Not here for debate but to just be a jaggoff.

PUT HIM ON IGNORE!
 

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
42,557
14,570
1
It’s not difficult to connect the dots and see where this ends up

1. Musk may or may not end up acquiring Twitter. I suspect Obama is going to sic the SEC against him to the point he withdraws his offer. It will probably be associated with something he said relative to Tesla.

2. Even if Musk is able to gain control of Twitter, the newly founded Dept of Truth will have preferential filtration capabilities over anything posted on Twitter. Any disgruntled Twitter employees will now simply go work for the Truth Ministry.

3. Twitter becomes so “moderated” by MiniTru, that people stop using it. MiniTru (Obama) wins.
Another conspiracy theory. How will your “Dept of Truth” filter Twitter content?

What is MiniTru?
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
19,245
21,885
1
Bloomberg= multibillionaire with massive media biz.
Zuckerberg= multibillionaire with massive media biz.
Bezos= multibillionaire with massive WaPo media inlfuencing biz.
Sulzberger family owns the NYT valued at over a billion.

All libs. Not a word said about them.
Hypocrisy is a design feature not a flaw with them.
 

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
42,557
14,570
1
Why do you keep going with this? No one denies that Twitter has right wingers on its platform. What we object to is that when it really counts, such as exposing crimes by the Biden Family before an election, Twitter has taken a side to thwart free speech that it feels is a threat to the political outcome they want. In that sense they are not a platform. They are a publisher.

Twitter was part of an effective media strategy that successfully threw the last election. Twitter's employees would not be in full meltdown mode right now if they were what they advertise. They realize that they will become powerless. They will become nothing but paper and pencil instead of the story.

You are not fooling anyone by making constant Straw Man arguments.
So you admit Twitter allows 99.99% of right wing content? Every social media or website restricts certain information. This board does it. The whole Twitter censorship thing is fake news. It hardly exists,
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,196
7,790
1
So you admit Twitter allows 99.99% of right wing content? Every social media or website restricts certain information. This board does it. The whole Twitter censorship thing is fake news. It hardly exists,

BS. Twitter filtered the most important stuff. Period. There was nothing false or physically threatening about it, except that it was a threat to the Democratic Party -- a challenge to their lies.
 

TN Lion

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2001
33,006
12,578
1
FRxmBNeXwAMVTOg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: The Spin Meister

m.knox

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 20, 2003
103,130
56,087
1
So you admit Twitter allows 99.99% of right wing content? Every social media or website restricts certain information. This board does it. The whole Twitter censorship thing is fake news. It hardly exists,

LOL... There is a reason why everyone laughs at you...