For the first time ever, Twitter fact-checks the President

[Rate This]

I'm sure Twitter is going to be consistent and fact check all the bullshit lies told about Trump the last 3 1/2 years...

They will probably do more of it going forward, this is one of those if you don’t like it then ignore it situations. It’s nobody’s fault that a man with a massive, free and automatic bully pulpit feels the need to use some other platform. He could just make these statements in a daily speech if he wanted to.

[Matt]

I'm sure Twitter is going to be consistent and fact check all the bullshit lies told about Trump the last 3 1/2 years...

They will probably do more of it going forward, this is one of those if you don’t like it then ignore it situations.

Speaking of Twitter: https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/ ... 273471002/

I get the feeling that a Trump-Whitmer insult fight would be akin to the PeeWee Herman-Frances Buxton "I know you are but what am I?" war of words.

[Rate This]

I'm sure Twitter is going to be consistent and fact check all the bullshit lies told about Trump the last 3 1/2 years...

They will probably do more of it going forward, this is one of those if you don’t like it then ignore it situations.

Speaking of Twitter: https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/ ... 273471002/

I get the feeling that a Trump-Whitmer insult fight would be akin to the PeeWee Herman-Frances Buxton "I know you are but what am I?" war of words.

Basically...

[km1125]

...
I simply asked if you have a problem with Twitter effectively taking sides and filling the shoes of a politician's opposition. Apparently you don't.
.....

The saying "the ends justify the means" comes to mind

[Lester The Nightfly]

It's really very simple. Don't spew jive that is easily verifiable as bullshit and you won't get the fact-check police flagging you. If you decline to do that then it should not come as a surprise you're going to get called out for it.

Why is this so difficult for some of you to grasp?

[screen glare]

Probably no retro-activity, Matt. Twitter will simply move forward from here. With King Trump now on notice that he’s just like everyone else.

Actually - NOT being treated like a king is what has him sputtering and screaming. Mommy has paddled his ass - in public.

Narcissistic Personality Disorder does not like to be exposed. The very next symptom you see is known as Narcissistic Rage. Look it up.

[Bryce]

It's really very simple. Don't spew jive that is easily verifiable as bullshit and you won't get the fact-check police flagging you.
Why is this so difficult for some of you to grasp?

Because Adam Schiff was never "fact-checked."

[Lester The Nightfly]

It's really very simple. Don't spew jive that is easily verifiable as bullshit and you won't get the fact-check police flagging you.
Why is this so difficult for some of you to grasp?

Because Adam Schiff was never "fact-checked."

Perhaps he should have been. If that had happened does that change the equation for Trump? Would you now have supported holding a measure of accountability to social media posts? I guess you're in the enviable (or chickenshit) position of giving yourself an out since, unless there's some retroactive component, we'll never see a Schiff fact check. Pretty convenient answer you served up...

[Lester The Nightfly]

Sorry for the long post that follows, but there's a lot to get to here...

First, the 2-post tweet in question from Trump:

There is NO WAY (ZERO!) that Mail-In Ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent. Mail boxes will be robbed, ballots will be forged & even illegally printed out & fraudulently signed. The Governor of California is sending Ballots to millions of people, anyone living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there, will get one. That will be followed up with professionals telling all of these people, many of whom have never even thought of voting before, how, and for whom, to vote. This will be a Rigged Election. No way!

For the first time ever, Twitter posted a fact-check link immediately under both halves of this tweet with an execlamation point and a link that reads "Get the facts about mail-in ballots." When you click on that link, you are taken to this page:

https://twitter.com/i/events/1265330601034256384

The headline is "Trump makes unsubstantiated claim that mail-in ballots will lead to voter fraud" and it goes on to say that:

On Tuesday, President Trump made a series of claims about potential voter fraud after California Governor Gavin Newsom announced an effort to expand mail-in voting in California during the COVID-19 pandemic. These claims are unsubstantiated, according to CNN, Washington Post and others. Experts say mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud.

There's quite a bit more stuff on this so-called "fact-check" page. Go read it....interesting stuff.

Now...the response from the Trump administration? An executive order...

According to a draft of the order obtained by CNBC, Trump would direct the Federal Communications Commission to propose and clarify regulations of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. It would also encourage the Federal Trade Commission to take action against companies engaging in “deceptive” acts of communication. The working draft of the order cites Twitter by name.

The statute targeted in the executive order is commonly criticized by lawmakers across the political spectrum for shielding Big Tech companies from liability for their users’ content. Section 230 was created to allow online platforms to engage in “good Samaritan” moderation of “objectionable” material without being treated like a publisher or speaker. In effect, some conservatives have claimed, it also allows them to get away with removing political views they object to. Social media companies like Twitter and Facebook have vigorously denied such accusations.

Ahead of the White House’s announcement about the executive order, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said he would introduce legislation “to end these special government giveaways.” He’s previously introduced a bill that would grant companies the liability protection if they submitted to audits to ensure their algorithms and content-removal practices are “politically neutral.

“If @Twitter wants to editorialize & comment on users’ posts, it should be divested of its special status under federal law (Section 230) & forced to play by same rules as all other publishers,” Hawley wrote in a tweet.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/28/twitter ... weets.html

========================================

My thoughts

First, Twitter is a privately owned company. I believe they have the legal right to respond in any way they see fit to any of its users' posts. It is really no different than MW on this site responding to any post by anybody in any of these otherwise public forums.

Now that said, I don't think Twitter should be in the business of directly engaging in political debate with any politicians, let alone the President (who is up for re-election). That should be up to the opposition party and their supporters, NOT the platform itself. Their so-called "Fact-Check" page reads more like something you would see put out by an opposing political party's campaign than a neutral strictly fact-based response. This page loses credibility for me the moment Twitter cite's CNN, of all sources, as its FIRST fact-check source. I mean seriously? CNN? That network is vehemently anti-Trump and as yellow as journalism gets, and they're who you cite to challenge the truth of one of the President's statements? That to me is beyond unbelievable.

It is also fair to point out that there is a big difference between an "unsubstantiated" claim and a "proven false" claim. Is the new burden on politicians moving forward (or at least, Republicans) that every post on twitter must be able to be proven to be true? Since when did Twitter become the arbitror of truth?

Bottom line is I think Twitter was way out of line here. They're effectively filling the shoes of the Joe Biden campaign, and doing something even Biden can't do - posting a link directly below one of the President's posts. Even Mark Zuckerberg this morning said that social media should not be in the business of fact-checking the President.

Twitter has been slammed for years for not addressing what are fairly clear violations of its terms of service by Trumps tweets. This is their attempt to mollify those criticisms..

Correct. Twitter is offering Trump a lifeline and doing him a favor with this action. They had three ways to address this: Ignore the issue at the risk of further damaging their credibility (and their continued viability as a business), drop the ban-hammer on Trump or do what they did. As a "it's just business" decision, it was the right call.

As far as "who" is cited as a fact-check source, that will always be problematic. Back in the day CBS and the "Morrow Boys" were the gold standard. In 1991 nobody seemed to have an issue with CNN when Bernard Shaw and Peter Arnett were covering Baghdad getting the snot bombed out it in the middle of the night. It's only been in the last month that Trump lost his erection for FOX, so are they now on the no credibility list? What are we to do? Cook up some Orwellian "Ministry of Truth"?. It will always be problematic, but it's still better than leaving someone in a position of power unchecked.

[screen glare]

Trump is a psychopathic liar.

Adam Schiff is not.

No contest.

No comparison.

The Trump cultists go after those in government who follow the Constitution - the law of the land - and hold Trump accountable.
He got himself impeached because he is an infamously lawless, un-careful, untrustworthy US president. With an enemies list. Who demands loyalty. And threatens those who dare speak truth to his power.

The worst US president in history.

[bmw]

Here we go.



The portion that got flagged...

....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!

[Rate This]

Here we go.



The portion that got flagged...

....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!

It’s not presidential. His original measured response was. He’s so damned impotent that he can’t even keep it up for 24 hours.

It also does violate their terms of service.

[Mr.Transistor]

Here we go.



The portion that got flagged...

....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!

I don't know who actually I think I do but if you are going to defend what Pres Trump said here, you are part of the problem. Talk about fanning the flames.....It's one thing if it's Joe Shmoe but this is coming from our leader.

[MWmetalhead]

What Twitter is doing is very unwise. Allow the other users of Twitter to rebut Trump's bullshit. There is no reason for the company itself to jump into the fracas.

If they fact check Trump, they should fact check all elected officials who hold federal office. I doubt Twitter will, though. They are going to open themselves to some bad publicity, not to mention legal risk.

[Bryce]

Pretty convenient answer you served up...

And one that is correct. As it stands at the moment, the "Twitter Tenet" is:

If we like you and support your cause and you are lying about someone we dislike, have at it. If we think you are disgusting and feel you are on the wrong side of the political spectrum, your ass is getting fact checked.

Much like a baseball player, I don't much care how an umpire calls balls and strikes as long as they call them the same way for each side.