Yeah I noticed you didn’t address it at all. At least you’re upfront about not caring about it
-
-
Replying to @do_rand @Benjamoofin and
For me it’s a question of the greater threat. Crowder possibly overstating something is far less serious than the potential misuse of YT’s influence powers, do that’s the claim I tested. I think he raiseda legit concern that is being to offhandedly dismissed by some. (cont)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @submandave @do_rand and
Why do you think that he used filtered results if the point could have just as easily been made without filtering the results? That doesn’t make you question his integrity in any way?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ateenytina @do_rand and
Did the fact that I performed independent trials before opining on his claims escape you? Most political pundits overstate or misrepresent to bolster their claims, happens across the spectrum. I extend blind trust to almost no one, even those w/ whom I generally agree. (cont)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @submandave @do_rand and
It did not. I’m asking why you personally believe that he misrepresented the problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ateenytina @do_rand and
For a similar reason that Adam Schiff represented his personal characterization of what happened as the actual call transcript when he opened his hearing. Framing the facts w/in a fabrication to influence opinion is done by almost all in politics. (cont)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @submandave @ateenytina and
IMHO, it’s far more concerning when elected officials do it in the course of their official duties than when random pundits do it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @submandave @do_rand and
So you believe it’s fine when a “random pundit” with an audience of millions lies to further an agenda because he’s not an elected official? Please, make this make sense.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ateenytina @do_rand and
“More concerning” does not imply approval. If there were a wasp and a tiger in my home, while I’m not “fine” with the wasp I’d find the tiger far more concerning. I’d prefer complete honesty from all parties, but I’m not so naive as to expect it. (cont)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @submandave @ateenytina and
THQH, until I know precisely what his critics mean by “filtered” I can’t evaluate if he’s being intentionally deceptive or merely engaging in typical hyperbole. You’re right, I don’t care so much because independent corroboration of the effects described raises larger concerns.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
If he were merely engaging in typical hyperbole he would just continue to conflate monetization with censorship, this was blatant misrepresentation on Crowders part. If you’re refusing to see that, there’s not much left to say, get better pundits?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.