Jack Dorsey denied what we knew was true, Twitter was rigged to censor conservatives. pic.twitter.com/IMDPooiAzG
— Terri Green (@TerriGreenUSA) December 9, 2022
Here's how the NY Post is reporting it:
Independent journalist Bari Weiss detailed in a series of posts how Twitter used so-called “shadow banning” to limit the visibility of tweets coming from far-right users.
Conservative talk show host Dan Bongino, Stanford University’s anti-COVID lockdown advocate Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, and right-wing activist Charlie Kirk were among the users targeted for suppression by Twitter, according to Weiss.
The former New York Times and Wall Street Journal writer said that the blacklists were built “in secret” and “without informing users.”
“A new [Twitter Files] investigation reveals that teams of Twitter employees build blacklists, prevent disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limit the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics — all in secret, without informing users,” Weiss wrote in a tweet Thursday.
Can Dorsey argue that he was using a different meaning of the term "shadow banning"?
WHERE'S JACK?
0.0.0 pic.twitter.com/mU6yzeJOg7
— jack (@jack) December 9, 2022
पोस्ट्स
३८ टिप्पण्या:
A good lawyer will argue with the terms.
They didn’t shadowban, they content filtered. What does “rigged” mean? That’s too vague a term. And we’ll hear “I don’t recall” a lot.
It was done for the highest purposes. We don’t want angry people to say things we’ll all regret, now do we?
Hayden. Fauci.
Dorsey is at the back of a very long line.
Hold him in contempt. Send him to jail. Steve Bannon got a jail term for simply refusing to testify.
Did Dorsey lie? Does a bear defecate in the woods?
These ar Humpty Dumpty moments. You either get agreement or acknowledgement on the meaning of terms of art/specialized terms you're going to use or you ask a multitude of very specific questions that scour the subject you want to explore.
In that vein, ever seen at subpoena from a federal govt agency? The definitions of the words go on for pages and expand the defined words beyond their common meaning, cover all tenses, before those defined terms are used to make their document demands. Same has to be done here or you later argue what the meaning of "is" is.
Twitter was safe and effective.
Depends on who the judge is...
... and NO lie, if it's a DC or NYC jury.
Of course he lied to Congress. But who doesn't? John Brennan lied to Congress. James Clapper lied to Congress. Hillary Clinton lied to Congress. They all lie to Congress all the time.
The key is: What Party are they affiliated with and how much do they hate Donald Trump. Those are the deciding factors as to whether or not it's a 'lie' or a LIE.
Someone lied before congress. Or as I like to call it...Tuesday.
Sternly worded letters of reprimand incoming....
A generation of children were taught an ethics framework where the ends justified the means, that all anti-left speakers were violent merely by speaking, and that one must play along with "good leftists" to receive a paycheck.
Twitter had no integrity because it was managed and staffed by people who literally didn't have any experience with integrity. Allowing all to speak, huh? Why? Listen to arguments and facts? Why? Walk in other's shoes? That's impossible, they aren't no my race/gender!!!!!
Ye shall reap what you sow.
No, because Dorsey appears to have been a figurehead and most likely didn't know the true extent of what was going on. A lot of people don't realize that the Rogan podcast with Dorsey, Tim Pool and Vijaya Gadde was done at Dorsey's behest to address the issue of bannings and suspensions. I think he'd pretty much lost control of the company to Gadde and Yoel Roth.
He can argue it, but it’s not a very good argument. It’s like when President Lisa Simpson raised taxes and called it a refund adjustment.
He is a lying progressive. Is there any other kind??
Dave Begley said...
Hold him in contempt. Send him to jail. Steve Bannon got a jail term for simply refusing to testify.
12/9/22, 6:35 AM
\
He isn't a Trump supporter, so he has nothing to worry about.
Democrats are soviets.
Democrats are an embarrassment. They must cheat and lie - just like Putin
Incidentally, Russia Today had this scoop years ago.
https://www.rt.com/news/494880-twitter-blacklist-leaked-images/
They even had screenshots or photos of internal Twitter displays with the same information, showing account statuses including "Search blacklist" and "Trending Blacklist," etc.
Natch, NOBODY in the mainstream media picked it up.
Don't be stupid, Congress already knew very well what the score was, since they were delivering the orders directly. It was open testimony, remember? Dorsey was lying to you.
What is 'lying' to Congress?
assuming which posture?
prone, supine, or prostrate
A generation of children were taught an ethics framework where the ends justified the means,
==============
I am seriously confused by this >>> is ethics about choosing ends or choosing means?
Don't call it "shadow banning."
They can equivocate, and claim that what they call "reducing reach" or whatever is something different than shadow banning.
They'll use the ambuguity to muddy the waters like Bill Clinton quibbling over the definition of "is."
Call it "blacklisting."
They can't really deny blacklisting when that's what they call it themselves in their own internal systems, according to those screenshots.
LOL! Dorsey was brought before Congress to publicly lie to them. There will be no criminal referral from Congress, nor would the DoJ bother to prosecute if there were, nor would a D.C. jury convict if I am wrong on the first two assertions.
The left: Authoritarian lying liars who lie.
I’m thoroughly enjoying watching these DNC-Media hacks defending how a bunch of Womyn Studies majors were banning real doctors at teaching hospitals. That’s almost as good as them pretending they can’t use Tweets as their source for a story.
Lying to Congress is very dependent on which party you belong to and especially on your attitude toward Trump.
"Did Jack Dorsey lie to Congress?"
Wrong question. Does it matter that Dorsey lied to Congress? Will Congress do anything about Dorsey lying to Congress?
Actually, those are also the wrong questions, since any questions are beside the point.
And Bill Clinton didn't have sex.
Nobody cares!
He's a liberal so NOTHING will happen to him.
Those are the new rules...better get used to them...
I don't think Dorsey is the villain here, although given his role, he may bear ultimate responsibility. It's the layer of professionals and corporate bureaucrats under him who screwed up. His fault was in letting them near the levers of his machine.
Previously unaired footage of Twitter Executives sending Jack Dorsey to testify to Congress while they take over the company.
Only conservatives are punished for lying to Congress. Left of center is a Get Out of Jail Free card.
If it walks like a duck, if it....
It's a duck. Unless the left calls it a goose.
He can argue: as CEO, my employees kept me in the dark on this. Other than that, no options.
Big Mike said...
Only conservatives are punished for lying to Congress. Left of center is a Get Out of Jail Free card.
This must further be broken down.
Only Trump supporters and people aligned with Republican Voters will be punished.
The Uniparty is the problem here and until Republican voters get what is actually going on nothing will change.
Dorsey is also CEO at Square, so it's possible he was out of the loop at Twitter.
That’s incidental. Conservatism is a censoring of reality, so any reality-based forum is necessarily seen as hostile to them.
I have a friend, a satirist who earned an OK living off Twitter and Facebook until he was shadow banned. Also removed from Paypal, and his products manufacturer cut him off. His bank closed his account. All for running a clearly satirical site that mocked communism and the Obamas.
Here. In America.
Ironically, before he came here, he was sentenced to brutal years in Siberia in a re-education camp for his creative activism. In third grade he was severely disciplined for drawing a cartoon of Lenin. He was banned from purchasing art supplies and had to trade bottles of liquor with permitted Artist Union members for mere access to paint and pencils and canvases. He was born in the early Sixties. You might say he was shadow banned from art supplies.
So he escaped one gulag for what is on the trajectory of becoming another one.
He also testified at that hearing. Only he told the truth. He's not a household name. There are thousands like him. I'm on some shadowy federal "bias person" watch list for merely testifying against hate crime laws. We are becoming a truly fascist nation, in the real definition of the term.
It's nice to see some people waking up. Finally. Where the hell were all you "civil liberties defenders" while this was being done to us? Protecting your cushy retirement accounts and jobs by zipping your lips.
Enjoy your success. I imagine you'll start whining when they come for you, and not a moment sooner. That's what all of a certain ilk do. I think it's called Substack?
Also, hpudding, I doubt your quisling name. Didn't you go to Georgetown and Dartmouth, not Harvard? Be a man.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा