You seem to want a final, ultimate decision on hate speech to be the product of all of this. I see the process (of public input, decision-making and transparency) as the ultimate product of this conflict.
-
-
I guess it just feels like a cop out to me. It’s clear the current policies are insufficient, and I want twitter to take accountability more quickly. I’m not convinced public comment will accomplish that.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
This is how governance works. You create a process. You allow public input. You take it into account and make collective decisions on the basis of that input. Business journalists are generally not trained or practiced in understanding this, unlike govt reporters.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Except this is a business and not the government.
2 replies 1 retweet 10 likes -
Over the very long run, I suspect a series of court cases and rulings may eventually add more definition to these questions and some of these companies may be able to buy-in public will/understanding by being more transparent with their decision-making processes.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @karaswisher and
I admire your optimism, but I don't foresee transparency in any of those companies decision-making process. I only see profit maximization and spin. Unless consumers/advertisers force changes, change won't happen. The only voice these companies hear is money.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KenGoldsholl @karaswisher and
It’s not optimism. It’s the historical sense to know that when new media technologies arise, eventually a court case on them will rise to the Supreme Court. And that Court, which will have an expansive view of the First Amendment, may not rule your way. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Burstyn,_Inc._v._Wilson …
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @karaswisher and
are you saying a court will force a company to be transparent? They may indeed provide a new interpretation of the !a relative to those networks, but that doesn't mean those companies will be honest about why they do things.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KenGoldsholl @karaswisher and
I’m saying eventually one of these cos will make a decision and the people affected by that decision will end up linking up with some ideologically minded donors, who will then fund their court case for years and then Cheeto’s Supreme Court will make a decision for all of us.
2 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @KenGoldsholl and
It is simpler than that. These companies need conservatives to protect them from regulation from the left but nobody in the GOP is going to defend them if they continue to engage in viewpoint discrimination.
5 replies 0 retweets 17 likes
I agreed with what you said right up until you said the words “viewpoint discrimination.”
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler @KenGoldsholl and
Well, we can debate whether they do externally but they definitely do internally. And I can show you some evidemc externally.
0 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 15 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.