Patterico's Pontifications

7/28/2019

Twitter’s War on the Entire Conservative Half of America Continues Apace

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:15 am



As everyone knows, the people who run Twitter are at war with half of America. This is not a matter of failed algorithms, poor judgment, and political bias on the part of moderators occasionally combining to result in ridiculous individual decisions. No, this is a war on conservative ideas, waged by the top people at Twitter, who literally want to silence entirely half of America because they hate our country and our president who has done so much for her.

The latest instance: well, look for yourself:

There you have it. Another conservative voice silenced. How many times must this happen before the people rise up and DEMAND that our government get to tell this private company what speech it may allow. THIS IS A MATTER OF FREE SPEECH. EVERYBODY WHO AGREES WITH ME SAY DAMN RIGHT, ON THREE. ONE, TWO…

Wait, someone just gave me a piece of paper.

*reads, as lips move*

He’s for the gun control?

Siri delete post

UPDATE: A second piece of paper says he’s the real guy, meaning the imposter, and therefore it is in fact a war on all of conservative America. Or something.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

116 Responses to “Twitter’s War on the Entire Conservative Half of America Continues Apace”

  1. How can she call it a “mistake” when the most obvious conclusion is deliberate political bias

    Patterico (115b1f)

  2. Diabolical!

    Dave (1bb933)

  3. Twitter is a showroom for displays of contemporary mental illness.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  4. What’s your basis for asserting that @realdavidhogg is pro-gun-control, and what does it matter even if it’s true? His bio (still viewable in the Google cache at https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:5c3pAtYvzM8J:https://twitter.com/realdavidhogg%3Flang%3Den+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk at the time of writing) unambiguously states that he is a “#Conservative”; what does it matter to the overall narrative if he also happens to hold one particular left-wing belief?

    Cabbage (feb229)

  5. Actually he wrote an editorial entitled “I’m David Hogg and I Support Gun Rights”.

    Not sure the narrative is correct here…

    Dave (1bb933)

  6. Here’s the message @RealDavidHogg posted on his GoFundMe page two hours ago:

    Friends. I’m so sorry for sending out an additional message. Gofundme doesn’t allow me to take anyone off the email list. But, I need your help today. I have been suspended on Twitter, and have appealed, and they won’t restore my account. See their comment in pic below. I am obviously the real David Hogg and this is exactly what I was afraid of. This David Hogg issue has been the hardest thing that has ever happened to me. I’ve been threatened, told I was going to be shot, bullied, etc. Is this why I haven’t gotten any scholarships? I can’t change my name. I am David Hogg, and I’m proud of my name & my conservative values. I am very upset about this. If anyone has a twitter account, please help me. I’ve reached out to our news station locally (who has helped me in the past – his name is Joe Bruno – he is on twitter at @JoeBrunoWSOC9.) He is the reporter who did all of the interviews with me that you see on this gofundme.

    Dave (1bb933)

  7. You forgot

    SHADOWBANNED

    and

    DE-PLATFORMED

    Leviticus (4d38bd)

  8. Twitter is for Justin Bieber fans.

    nk (dbc370)

  9. Censorship is censorship. It does not get better by being misapplied.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  10. It is kind of ludicrous to accuse the guy of impersonation. He received death threats from right-wing nutcases who thought he was the pro gun-control Parkland survivor (also) named David Hogg (@davidhogg111) and just about everything he’s written on his now-blocked Twitter page and his GoFundMe page is trying to convince people that he is *not* the same David Hogg.

    Dave (1bb933)

  11. The reason he can’t get scholarships might be his mediocre grades and SATs. It doesn’t say he’s not being admitted anywhere. Maybe he should get some loans.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  12. Oh, wait. He IS an impersonator? He IS a gun nut? He isn’t “the REAL David Hogg”? Twitter protects its own, and the post is severely damaged.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  13. Patterico, thanks for the update, but your post now has some severe cognitive dissonance.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  14. I predict TrumpWorld will pounce on this post soon, if not corrected…

    Dave (1bb933)

  15. It is kind of ludicrous to accuse the guy of impersonation. He received death threats from right-wing nutcases who thought he was the pro gun-control Parkland survivor (also) named David Hogg (@davidhogg111) and just about everything he’s written on his now-blocked Twitter page and his GoFundMe page is trying to convince people that he is *not* the same David Hogg.

    Maybe he’s better off being suspended.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  16. Patterico: “How many times must this happen before the people rise up and DEMAND that our government get to tell this private company what speech it may allow.”

    Sounds like a publisher, rather than a platform, if we’re telling Twitter to allow certain forms of speech they’ve decided to ban.

    And, when did the people rise up and DEMAND that our government give them Section 230 protection?

    Munroe (0b2761)

  17. Maybe he’s better off being suspended.

    Heh, modern-day “protective custody”

    Dave (1bb933)

  18. If not for Section 230 protection, Twitter would be facing hundreds of thousands of lawsuits from the Orange Poo-flinger’s (a/k/a Trump) tweets alone.

    nk (dbc370)

  19. I blame Siri.

    Dave (1bb933)

  20. Trust me, there are times I think I’d be better off suspended.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  21. I am obviously the real David Hogg and this is exactly what I was afraid of.

    It’s trolling or incredible cluelessness. Take your pick.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  22. If not for Section 230 protection, Twitter would be facing hundreds of thousands of lawsuits from the Orange Poo-flinger’s (a/k/a Trump) tweets alone.

    “Now witness the firepower of this fully-armed and operational Article Two!”

    Dave (1bb933)

  23. Hey, wait a minute! No Twitter at all means no Twitter for Trump! Shut it down!

    nk (dbc370)

  24. “It’s trolling or incredible cluelessness. Take your pick.”
    Patterico (115b1f) — 7/28/2019 @ 11:19 am

    Obviously, he should change his name. Someone named David Hogg from birth can’t be the real David Hogg anymore. Ban him.

    Kind of like Michael Douglas changed his name to Michael Keaton because a fake Michael Douglas was much more famous.

    Munroe (0b2761)

  25. Twitter is for twits. Exhibit A: Orange Julius.

    As if it was the only communications platform in the world…

    Rather than complain about it– just don’t use it.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  26. What do you need twitter for?

    mg (8cbc69)

  27. The actual “real” David Higg is the more famous David Hogg.

    @realdavidhogg should be @theotherdavidhogg. Or at most @theolderdavidhogg or maybe, if it applies, * @theoriginaldavidhogg (though that could be confusing)

    Twitter should just have required him to change his handle. And maybe written some rule to cover when that should happen. That’s what to do if you want to be fair.

    And maybe arrange for disambiguation note when anyine tries the older, discontinued handles.

    ================
    *It could be that realdavidhogg was on Twitter first because why is the Parkland David Hogg @davidhogg111 ?

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)


  28. 26.What do you need twitter for?

    It’s a good way to have heated arguments with complete strangers.

    Other than that….

    kishnevi (496414)

  29. Lindsay shepherd, heshmat alavi, the analyst on black bloc/media connections, those are just three that come to mind.

    Narciso (a0a0bf)

  30. David Hogg of Parkland joined Twitter in 2013. The now banned David Hogg joined in 2018.

    kishnevi (496414)

  31. Re: Tulsi Gabbard goole shutdown:

    The New York Times has a one sentence explanation (in oarenthessis) in the “What’s Next” section of the Sunday July 28, 2019 Business Section:

    Google says the shutdown was
    caused by the accounts “unusually high activity” — often a sign of fraud that its systems are designed to flag

    Now what does that mean? If someone runs avery successful advertisement, they get shut down?

    Or is there something more to it – like where the activity was coming from?

    Maybe this was someone, maybe a foreign power, trying to help Tulsi Gabbard?

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)

  32. ‘The actual “real” David Higg is the more famous David Hogg.‘
    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892) — 7/28/2019 @ 11:47 am

    Right. So, part of being a platform is deciding who is more famous. LOL

    Munroe (0b2761)

  33. 30. kishnevi (496414) — 7/28/2019 @ 11:53 am

    30.David Hogg of Parkland joined Twitter in 2013. The now banned David Hogg joined in 2018.

    Well, that means that the banned David Hogg was just 100% wrong in calling himself @realdavidhogg

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)

  34. Well, actually, what it means is that the banned David Hogg is a petulant, entitled, cry-baby and only good for laughs.

    nk (dbc370)

  35. 32. Munroe (0b2761) — 7/28/2019 @ 11:54 am

    So, part of being a platform is deciding who is more famous. LOL

    In this case, it’s not a hard call., You could do it by the number of followers, maybe, or if there is a way to distinguish them, Google results. And when someone uses the handle @real…. he’s really making a claim to be the more famous one.

    Another way is selecting a random jury of Twitter users and, after oresenting the arguments for each side, and giiving them a day or two to think it over, asking them to decide.

    There would be other cases where it would not be so clear who’s entitled to the handle. Uusally you go by who used it first and here it seems in 2013 David Hogg never used @davidhogg let alone @realdavidhogg.

    The platform really can’t allow this confusion, biut they shouldn’t ban him entirely especially if most of what he is doing is claiming to be the person entitled to use the name David Hogg. (and, of course, capitalizing on the notoriety of the Parkland David Hogg.

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)

  36. He’s obviously a fake David Hogg. He should change his name to David Hogg111.

    Munroe (0b2761)

  37. Well, that means that the banned David Hogg was just 100% wrong in calling himself @realdavidhogg

    I don’t follow. When choosing an online screen name, you take whatever is available. Obviously there are many people with a given name like David Hogg or Donald Trump, and none of them has more right to the name, or is more “real” than any other.

    This is the relevant part of Twitter’s impersonation policy:

    Impersonation policy

    Impersonation is a violation of the Twitter Rules. Twitter accounts that pose as another person, brand, or organization in a confusing or deceptive manner may be permanently suspended under Twitter’s impersonation policy.

    What is not an impersonation policy violation?

    Accounts with similar usernames or that are similar in appearance (e.g., the same profile image) are not automatically in violation of the impersonation policy. In order to violate our impersonation policy, the account must portray another entity in a misleading or deceptive manner.

    An account will not be removed if:

    The user shares your name but has no other commonalities, or

    The profile clearly states it is not affiliated with or connected to any similarly-named individuals or brands.

    On the archived Twitter page, under his photo, it said:

    I’m David Hogg. Not THAT one. I’m THIS one. I’m 18, early college student, HUGE volunteer, hard worker. I’m only responsible for MY actions.

    Immediately below that is a link to his GoFundMe page, and the first sentence there reads:

    I’m David Hogg, the one from Charlotte, NC. I’m not the ‘other’ David Hogg from Parkland, FL.

    There is literally nothing on his Twitter page that could be fairly described as impersonation.

    Dave (1bb933)

  38. 36
    Especially since his real name is (apparently) David Hogg.

    If David Hogg of Parkland had some class, he would call on Twitter to reinstate the other David Hogg’s account. I’m not holding my breath.

    kishnevi (496414)

  39. https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/07/four-pinocchios-for-the-washington-post.php

    Omar falsely asserts that “white men…are actually causing most of the deaths within this country.”

    This is so wrong, you have to reinterpret her.

    Omar apparently is talking about deaths caused by massacre. Ordinary homicide is not recognized by her.

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)

  40. 38. Dave (1bb933) — 7/28/2019 @ 12:07 pm

    There is literally nothing on his Twitter page that could be fairly described as impersonation.

    Except that his handle was @realdavidhogg

    Now what were people supposed to think when they saw that?

    Yes, you could figure out pretty quickly, after a minute or two, he’s not the famous Parkland one.

    It seems like he’s almost the same age but from North Carolina. I wonder of there are any other Daviid Hogg;s on Twitter?

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)

  41. Maybe Twitter did need an updated policy about the use of the word “real” as part of a handle.

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)

  42. Omar apparently is talking about deaths caused by massacre. Ordinary homicide is not recognized by her.

    Or she might be including more than homicide (e.g. attributing large numbers of deaths to evil corporations for various sins, real or imagined).

    The CEOs of the tobacco industry were all white men in 1994, when they all testified to Congress that they believed nicotine is not addictive. And the current CEO of Philip Morris, for example, is the worst kind of white person – a Greek. About 25 times as many people die from the effects of smoking as are murdered every year…

    A true progressive like Omar would doubtless also include oil companies, drug companies, gun manufacturers, etc in the body count.

    Dave (1bb933)

  43. hogg wanted to bring about the result of dunblane Hungerford and port Arthur to that end, he was scott Israel’s marionette,

    narciso (d1f714)

  44. Heh!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  45. It took me forever to figure this out since I don’t do Twitter.

    The guy calling himself the “real” David Hogg signed up after the other David Hogg and after the other David became known because of the Parkland shooting. Maybe he used the word “real” because he wanted to emphasize it was really his name, but it could also be that he was trading on the other David Hogg’s name recognition. If so, then that is a form of impersonation.

    DRJ (15874d)

  46. possibly, it’s like you need stick pins and string to tell them apart,

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/28/baltimore-rat-infestation-documentary-trump/

    narciso (d1f714)

  47. The guy calling himself the “real” David Hogg signed up after the other David Hogg and after the other David became known because of the Parkland shooting. Maybe he used the word “real” because he wanted to emphasize it was really his name, but it could also be that he was trading on the other David Hogg’s name recognition. If so, then that is a form of impersonation.

    Yeah, the quote in the GoFundMe strikes me as someone taking advantage inappropriately in some way. I mean, come on:

    I am obviously the real David Hogg and this is exactly what I was afraid of.

    “I am obviously real David Hogg” is someone clueless or trolling. Is he actually making money off this? *checks* why yes, he is. He’s taking advantage of the fact that his name happens to be the same as the gun control guy and the whole “I am obviously the real David Hogg” bit is part of it.

    He might be a decent kid and he might be trying to dodge unpleasantness in some ways, but he’s clearly taking advantage in other ways, and calling himself “the” real David Hogg does not help the perception.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  48. ‘He might be a decent kid and he might be trying to dodge unpleasantness in some ways, but he’s clearly taking advantage in other ways, and calling himself “the” real David Hogg does not help the perception.’
    Patterico (115b1f) — 7/28/2019 @ 1:23 pm

    Suspending him does not help the perception that Twitter is biased against conservatives either, which I thought was the point of the post.

    Or, is the point now to call out someone whose real name is David Hogg?

    Munroe (0b2761)

  49. oh never mind:

    Simply corrected the sourcing, not the conclusion.

    Dave (1bb933)

  50. *Twitter is not biased

    Munroe (0b2761)

  51. one had an official imprimatur, of course that isn’t determinative, take crowdstrike as a single source,

    https://babalublog.com/2019/07/28/venezuelans-ignored-warnings-from-cuban-exiles-were-convinced-venezuela-would-never-become-like-cuba/#comments

    narciso (d1f714)

  52. it’s curious what Dorsey allows and doesn’t deem acceptable,

    https://twitter.com/alimhaider/status/1155325664318382080

    narciso (d1f714)

  53. Section 230

    Isn’t related to this issue.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  54. If not for Section 230 protection, Twitter would be facing hundreds of thousands of lawsuits from the Orange Poo-flinger’s (a/k/a Trump) tweets alone.

    Now here’s a interesting question: Without Section 230 would Twitter be liable for Congressional tweets, given that the Congressional tweeter has constitutional immunity?

    Is the President liable for what he says in the course of his job, or does he have the same kind of immunity Congress enjoys? Has this been litigated?

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  55. At some point Twitter will realize they would be better off just having a nanny filter and otherwise letting things play as they would. As has been stated many times, the best response to bad speech is better speech, and censorship does not help in any way. Their sponsors may grumble, but there really isn’t all that much of that kind of thing. Perhaps Twitter would allow them a sponsor-side filter.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  56. seeing that the deal with Guatemala, and the wall building and mexico’s actions, do you think you’re reactions, a few weeks back were overdone,

    https://nypost.com/2019/07/28/haitis-resources-are-limited-by-their-unstable-government/?utm_source=NYPTwitter&utm_medium=SocialFlow&utm_campaign=SocialFlow

    narciso (d1f714)

  57. Please.

    Conservatives have a plethora of platforms to preach from not to mention and entire global television network and its associated print and broadcast outlets across assorted mediums.

    Their problem is the messengers but the message. ‘Folks’ have simply tuned’em out.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  58. ^is=isn’t

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  59. fox is 50/50, one America and newsmax, have little exposure, abc, nbc, cbs, the times the post the journal, were revealed to be in concert with the democrats in 2016, and there is no indication anything has changed in 3 years

    https://twitter.com/paulsperry_

    narciso (d1f714)

  60. “As has been stated many times, the best response to bad speech is better speech, and censorship does not help in any way. ”

    This isn’t true. If Patterico didn’t moderate this forum, no amount of “better speech” would restrain trolls and spammers.

    Unmoderated forums, especially anonymous ones, must be moderated or they devolve into garbage.

    Davethulhu (bc6fa6)

  61. Also, time to link this again:

    Online platforms are within their First Amendment rights to moderate their online platforms however they like, and they’re additionally shielded by Section 230 for many types of liability for their users’ speech. It’s not one or the other. It’s both.

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/no-section-230-does-not-require-platforms-be-neutral

    Davethulhu (bc6fa6)

  62. Davethulhu (bc6fa6) — 7/28/2019 @ 2:48 pm

    Exactly.

    Section 230 allows them to be publishers, not platforms, and assume little or no responsibility for the editorial decisions they make.

    Munroe (0b2761)

  63. Davethulhu (bc6fa6) — 7/28/2019 @ 2:48 pm

    Exactly.

    Section 230 allows them to be publishers, not platforms, and assume little or no responsibility for the editorial decisions they make.

    Sweet. As it should be!

    Patterico (115b1f)

  64. Publishers are responsible for their own words but not other people’s. That is why Patterico is responsible for his words but not yours, Munroe.

    DRJ (15874d)

  65. Poor Munroe is being oppressed by the social medias. They are stomping on his free speeches

    Patterico (115b1f)

  66. @62. fox is 50/50… etc., etc.

    Except it’s not. Recall that list of 20 or National Review whiners opposed to you-know-who and soundly rejected and outcast. The tail no longer wags the dog. “In case of emergency, break glass and shout “Reagan.” See if that ol’canard works. =crickets= It’s not the messenger platforms but the message that’s been tuned out. And long overdue.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  67. It is the violence inherent in the operating system.

    nk (dbc370)

  68. ooo this guy and the racist punk are theoretically worth half a billion victim dollars now

    Dustin (6d7686)

  69. …a.k.a. the post-Ryanist conservative’s version of the ghetto lottery (police brutality payouts).

    urbanleftbehind (ea5d11)

  70. ‘Course ‘conservative half of America’ is wishful thinking, too. If it was, Trump would never have gotten the GOP nom nor elected- and by pure voter count, HRC beat him anyway… so ‘half’ is the ‘echo’ still reverberating for the bewildered in the chamber. The GOP is– what– 91% backing Trump now. That’s a sea change… just as in ’64. It’s the speed that change has occurred which should have ideological conservatives pondering, planning- and retooling for 2024.

    Pence is just inert ballast now; baggage. My bet remains Trump/Haley 2020 if our Captain reads his charts right… and he gives her a place to land safely when she bails out from the 737Max fire at Boeing. Nikki Haley is the GOP’s future.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  71. DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/28/2019 @ 3:34 pm

    What color is the sky on your planet?

    Dave (1bb933)

  72. “Poor Munroe is being oppressed by the social medias. They are stomping on his free speeches”
    Patterico (115b1f) — 7/28/2019 @ 3:09 pm

    Straw man.

    How about poor wittle victims of terrorist attacks. Boo hoo!

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sanbernardino-attack-decision-idUSKCN1OW16Q

    Munroe (0b2761)

  73. Applying how Twitter treats conservatives to cleaning s**t off the sidewalks:

    “The area surrounding King County Superior Court includes a homeless shelter and other social-services organizations and has become an “unsanitary and potentially frightening” scene — one “that reeks of urine and excrement” — according to an article in the Seattle Times. Desperate for help with the disgusting environment, two of the court’s judges have asked the city to please power-wash the poop-covered sidewalks. That seems like a pretty reasonable request, but apparently, one councilman is worried that doing so might be a form of microaggression. A councilman in Seattle is reportedly opposed to hosing sidewalks that reek of excrement near a local courthouse because he fears that it might be racially insensitive.”

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/city-councilman-hosing-poop-covered-sidewalks-might-be-racially-insensitive/?fbclid=IwAR0_8jaxgf5QvrhwoRlcHWYIJWeAQUGx65-sYhmIv5w6BxO909BA2jh1YZg

    harkin (58d012)

  74. @74. Not a Mormon, Dave, but feel free to share your shade of grey.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  75. Only If one is deplatformed like lindsay shepherd, for reasons outside the terms of service.

    Narciso (a0a0bf)

  76. 63. Moderating a forum is not the same thing as censoring for content (which an increasing number of conservative blogs seem to be doing anyway). If this blog was censored for content, I suspect there would be a lot fewer Trump Humpers plying their adoration for Trump in the comment section.

    Gryph (08c844)

  77. 76… see the racism inherent in teh p00p!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  78. Conservatives have a plethora of platforms to preach from

    Because Fox News? Of the major news networks and newspapers, it’s that and maybe WSJ. Both of which are pretty center-right now. Can you name another?

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  79. Anyone who says that Fox News is hard right is hard left.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  80. If this blog was censored for content, I suspect there would be a lot fewer Trump Humpers plying their adoration for Trump in the comment section.

    Heh. If. Stunning. Absolutely stunning.

    Ptw (385fa4)

  81. Patterico is a publisher and is not responsible for what others post. If he removes something, it’s because it offends him, not because it’s libelous.

    Matter of fact, given the ruling against Sandman, pretty much anything Patterico posts isn’t subject to libel law either, assuming he puts “I believe” in front of his opinions.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  82. “Can you name another?”

    Talk radio. I’m old enough to remember the calls for a new “fairness doctrine”. Do you want a fairness doctrine for Twitter?

    Davethulhu (bc6fa6)

  83. This is what the tech companies are doing de facto, imposing a ‘fairness doctrine’ by algorithm

    Narciso (a0a0bf)

  84. The obvious answer is simple: have a conservative start up his own social media site similar to Twitter. Of course, then we get an echo chamber in both Twitter and whatever the conservative site is called.

    Robert Stacey Stacy McCain got permanently banned from Twitter, so he started right back up again under a pseudonym The Patriarch Tree. I’m still wondering when I’m going to get banned for “deadnaming” or “misgendering” the ‘transgendered.’

    The libertarian Dana (822212)

  85. “The obvious answer is simple: have a conservative start up his own social media site similar to Twitter. ”

    There is one. It’s called Gab, and it’s billed as the free speech alternative to Twitter. Unsurprisingly, it’s filled with white supremacists and neo-nazis.

    Davethulhu (bc6fa6)

  86. @82. Aside from the large global footprint of Murdoch interests, don’t be so lazy. Better you should do your own homework, K. It’s not the lack of messaging platforms- [good grief, conservatives virtually “own” the talk radio format and platforms] but the message itself. 2016 and the fate of that anti-Trump, Nat’l Review gang, the long failing Weekly Standard and so forth should have shown you it’s past time to retool. And George Will, Bill Kristol types ain’t the mechanics for this century.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  87. Heh. If. Stunning. Absolutely stunning.

    Ptw (385fa4) — 7/28/2019 @ 4:34 pm

    You obviously have an axe to grind, and I am sorry you’re this worried about it, but I don’t think this blog has ever censored someone just because of their point of view. You’re claiming this is not true, so I’m asking you to put up your proof or withdraw the claim.

    Moderating people for misbehavior is different than for having a pro-Trump or pro-whatever else perspective.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  88. “It’s not the lack of messaging platforms- [good grief, conservatives virtually “own” the talk radio format and platforms] but the message itself. 2016 and the fate of that anti-Trump, Nat’l Review gang, the long failing Weekly Standard and so forth should have shown you it’s past time to retool. And George Will, Bill Kristol types ain’t the mechanics for this century.”

    >’Conservatives have all sorts of platforms!’

    > Cites billionaire-funded Beltway conservative platforms with gatekeeping and message discipline tighter than Epstein’s legal defense who all gleefully cheered Twitter’s no-platforming when it happened to people to their immediate right.

    So in other words, it WAS the lack of effective messaging platforms that was the problem, is what you’re saying?

    Illerminaty (496d9b)

  89. Right it’s not Obama appointees on Mastercard board that have blocked patreon, not Google whose whistleblowers have admitted their bias from damore to grasso who have given the game away, it’s not terrorist apologists like old squid who get carte blanche and career federal prosecutors who get banned

    Narciso (a0a0bf)

  90. @83. Ever heard of Roger Ailes? Thanks for playing, K.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  91. @92. No, it was the message that was and remains the problem. Too many years in the echo chamber. You can have a million soapboxes and hundreds of talk radio hosts broadcasting in your camp but if the message falls on deaf ears numb to the baloney, it’s not for a lack of outlets. Revisit that list of conservatives in the primaries -most syndicated in print and voiced on various media outlets- who opposed to Trump- particularly that single National Review issue and their poison pen essays opposing him. The tail no longer wags the dog. They’re on the outs because their message no longer resonates with the changing demographics of the electorate. But go ahead and keep ignoring it.

    It’s glorious.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  92. Twitter had gone Hogg wild! Sou-ee. Root Hogg or die.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  93. We need more people sticking up for the Multi-billion dollar social media quasi-monopolies. They’d stick up for you! Fair is fair.

    Google/Twitter/Facebook need your protection. A small “conservative” donation or a word of support will feed Mark Zuckberg’s starving employees. Please help!

    rcocean (1a839e)

  94. Robert Stacey McCain is still alive?

    rcocean (1a839e)

  95. “We need more people sticking up for the Multi-billion dollar social media quasi-monopolies. They’d stick up for you! Fair is fair.’

    I’m with you, comrade. Twitter must be nationalized.

    Davethulhu (bc6fa6)

  96. The best thing going for Twitter is how other media platforms pick up what’s said on it as content for their own programming. The Beast needs fed 24/7. Hell, you hear more about Twitter content on cable news, radio and broadcast news than anyplace else– especially if you don’t use Twitter.

    And that’s because our media savvy Captain uses it as conduit to the other platforms hungry for content, side-stepping traditional media gatekeepers. It’s irritatingly brilliant. He may be dead reckoning in the fog when to comes to steering the ship of state but when it comes to media manipulation, our Captain knows exactly what he’s doing- seasoned by years of navigating the choppy waters of the media capital of the world– New York City. Trump makes that ol’ Hollywood ‘Great Communicator’ look like an amateur.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  97. Matter of fact, given the ruling against Sandman, pretty much anything Patterico posts isn’t subject to libel law either, assuming he puts “I believe” in front of his opinions.

    Kevin M (21ca15) — 7/28/2019 @ 4:36 pm

    I don’t think that is how libel law works.

    DRJ (15874d)

  98. No Twitter, No Trump!
    Shut It Down, Lock Him Up!
    (repeat)

    nk (dbc370)

  99. Trump makes that ol’ Hollywood ‘Great Communicator’ look like an amateur.

    No, he does not. He grabs attention, but that is not communication.
    Communication is conveying ideas to an audience. Trump has no ideas to communicate, only slogans and cliches, and an incoherent flow of words.

    Kishnevi (14a2e1)

  100. Trump has no ideas to communicate, only slogans and cliches, and an incoherent flow of words.

    And bald-faced lies. Don’t forget those.

    Dave (1bb933)

  101. 47. DRJ (15874d) — 7/28/2019 @ 1:04 pm

    The guy calling himself the “real” David Hogg signed up after the other David Hogg and after the other David became known because of the Parkland shooting. Maybe he used the word “real” because he wanted to emphasize it was really his name,

    Then it should have been: @davidhoggforreal

    but it could also be that he was trading on the other David Hogg’s name recognition.

    I don’t know enough to tell, but it would seem so.

    And he probably originally didn’t distinguish himself from he Parkland David Hogg, but then he started getting direct messages lambasting him and worse for being in favor of gun control, so then he changed some things to say he wasn’t THAT David Hogg, but still didn’t change his Twitter handle, which he could have done. (he’d lose some privileges but get them back in a month, if I understand things correctly.)

    Note: We have screen shots but they are only of how his account looked near the end, not how it might have looked six or ten months ago, when he might really have been trying to fool people.

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)

  102. 57. Kevin M (21ca15) — 7/28/2019 @ 2:03 pm

    Without Section 230 would Twitter be liable for Congressional tweets, given that the Congressional tweeter has constitutional immunity?

    The constitutional immunity only applies to official acts of Conress or exact quotations. To get constitutional immunity, the member of Congress would first have to enter his or her (or another pronoun’s?) tweets in the Congressional Record or something similar.

    Is the President liable for what he says in the course of his job, or does he have the same kind of immunity Congress enjoys?

    No, he doesn’t, but the modern first amendment freedom of speech doctrine goes pretty far. I don’t know if any president has ever been sued for defamation even pre-1964.

    Sammy Finkelman (fbd892)

  103. I think this the piglets little cry for attention, he should be prepping for cambridge orientation no.

    Shep Smith Is the face of fox and as such hes as credulous as any of these other hacks ole miss’s missing village idiot.

    Narciso (a0a0bf)

  104. Narciso, as of now the David Hogg of Parkland seems to have no connection to what Twitter did. Perhaps he complained to Twitter about impersonation, but no evidence of that has surfaced yet. This is all between Twitter and David Hogg of North Carolina.

    Kishnevi (14a2e1)

  105. I don’t know the latter from Adam, but the firmer was going the lynch mob against the second amendment, going along with the narrative that absolved everyone from the principal to doe policy directives

    Narciso (a0a0bf)

  106. Yes, but it’s the one you don’t know about whom Twitter banned, and no indication the famous one had anything to do with it.

    Kishnevi (14a2e1)

  107. If Christian bakers have to make wedding cakes with rainbows and two brides then Twitter can’t limit anyone for content.

    kaf (6cbb44)

  108. Twitter’s impersonation policy says they only act on complaints (i.e. they do not search for violators themselves).

    Dave (1bb933)

  109. @103. Except he does, k.

    And better.

    Much better.

    That you, personally, may not warm to what he ‘communicates’ and how he does it is superfluous. That in itself is communicating. It’s been my biz for decades. He knows exactly what he’s doing. No 3X5 cards for Trump when he vamps a flow of consciousness for 90 minutes at his rallies, k. The crowds and the media eat it up. Reagan was a piker compare to Trump on this, k.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  110. @104/104. So? So he lies. So do all politicians. You think Reagan never lied? Hell, he ws an actor- born liars. He copped to faking radio play-by-play when the wires went down. And Iran Contra? Sober up. The very fact you even bother to discuss Trump’s chatter should tell you he is succeeding at communicating. And entertaining. You just don’t like either.

    The new GOP does.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  111. “Twitter’s impersonation policy says they only act on complaints”
    Dave (1bb933) — 7/28/2019 @ 7:41 pm

    Devin Nunes’ Mom and Devin Nunes’ Cow are really his mom and cow, and that’s why it doesn’t violate the impersonation policy.

    Munroe (0b2761)

  112. 115. Munroe (0b2761) — 7/28/2019 @ 8:41 pm

    Devin Nunes’ Mom and Devin Nunes’ Cow are really his mom and cow, and that’s why it doesn’t violate the impersonation policy.

    It doesn’t because it is obvious (albeit cruel and bad) parody. Npbpfy thinkd that is what it is.

    Sammy Finkelman (f61675)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4078 secs.