If you're amplifying both sides, and making it about the bad faith of the other, not the substance, you're not amplifying an important protest. You're just twisting the knife.
-
-
BUt given the political world we live in--where legit protest can be attacked using non-RU magnifying methods--you've delegitimized tactics
-
Hashtag politics have worked in past, work now. Until that changes or better tactics identified you will continue to see this, organic or no
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You seem to be convinced my thread was saying something about protest in the United States, which it adamantly was not. But I'll leave it there.
-
What was it then? Is the NFL hashtag battle not something that happened in response to protest in the US?
-
"Be aware that much of this dispute is being hijacked by people acting in bad faith without reference to the substance" is not an assertion about how to protest, or if the substance is valid.
-
This tweet suggests that bots are never used by people who believe in the substance. Do you believe that?https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/914496955434307584 …
-
"X is amplified by Y" does not imply "there does not exist an x in X such that x was not amplified by Y"
-
Not my question. Do you believe bots are only ever used by people acting in bad faith?
-
wait-by definition aren't bots impersonating peeps? isn't that inherent bad faith? at least watching a TV product ad you know they r actors
-
That's a really good question. I'm not sure my answer wrt legal v ethical standards would be the same.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
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.