Patterico's Pontifications


Biden’s Disinformation Director: Hey, Verified Twitter Users Should Edit Other People’s Tweets!

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:13 pm

[guest post by Dana]

Because that blue check indiciates trustworthiness, knowledge, and expertise or something:

Nina Jankowicz — whose appointment as director of the new Disinformation Governance Board in the Department of Homeland Security has stoked concerns about government censorship — told participants in a recent Zoom chat that she is “verified” by Twitter before adding that “there are a lot of people who shouldn’t be verified, who aren’t legit” because “they’re not trustworthy.”

She then adds: “Verified people can essentially start to ‘edit’ Twitter [in] the same sort of way that Wikipedia is so they can add context to certain tweets.”

Jankowicz then offered up a hypothetical.

“If President [Donald] Trump were still on Twitter and tweeted a claim about voter fraud, someone could add context from one of the 60 lawsuits that went through the court or something that an election official said…so that people have a fuller picture rather than just an individual claim on a tweet,” she said.

Doesn’t the Director of Disinformation know that the Twitter comment section already exists where any user can respond to a specific tweet with their own thoughts? This just sounds like a government official is suggesting that a private company’s levers of power be in control of the government and a select group of pre-approved, trustworthy blue-checked individuals. How is this not absolutely ridiculous? And what happens when the other side of the aisle takes the White House and installs their own “trustworthy” editors? Would Jankowicz be okay with, oh, I don’t know…Trump Jr. editing one of her tweets??

I’ll leave you with a tiny list of some notable, random blue-checks on Twitter. How’d you like them to edit your tweets, or anyone else’s?

Leonardo DiCaprio
Mike Cernovich
Britney Spears
Hillary Clinton
Marjorie Taylor Green
Brian Stelter
Whoopi Goldberg
Donald Trump Jr.


27 Responses to “Biden’s Disinformation Director: Hey, Verified Twitter Users Should Edit Other People’s Tweets!”

  1. America is getting dumber by the day.

    Dana (5395f9)

  2. And poorer. Morons sending 40 billion to Ukraine, instead of dealing with our issues.
    81 million dumb.

    mg (8cbc69)

  3. @2. Yep. Went shopping today; saw two families and a veteran asking for ‘help’ along the roadside; low grade gas was $6/gal; diesel $6.60; beef at $10/lb.,; 72/28 hamburger at $6/lb.; milk $4.10 half gallon; butter $4.80/lb.; shortages of baby formula- limited sales, empty shelves… even a cat food shortage… and all prices up since last week. Watched an elderly couple toss steak back in the beef bin in disgust; too expensive. Put some back myself- just too costly. And each thing reminded me of Joe and the imbeciles who voted to give $40 billion to Ukraine and care more about other lands than their own citizens. “Morons” is too polite a term.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  4. Is her job even legal?

    nk (1d5cfe)

  5. @2. Rand Paul Blocks Quick Senate Passage of $40 Billion Ukraine Aid Bill

    Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on Thursday blocked speedy Senate passage of a $40 billion aid package for Ukraine, defying leaders of both parties who urged lawmakers to approve the military and economic assistance quickly and warning that “we cannot save Ukraine by dooming the U.S. economy.”

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) had called on both Republicans and Democrats “to help us pass this urgent funding bill today,” but Paul refused to allow the unanimous agreement the Senate needed to proceed to a vote on the bill. Paul wanted language inserted into the bill to have a federal watchdog oversee the Ukraine aid.

    “I’m not allowing a speedy passage of the bill without having something fiscally responsible in the bill,” Paul told reporters, and in a speech on the Senate floor he criticized the additional deficit spending, warning that it fuels inflation and ignores domestic priorities. “We will have to borrow that money from China to send it to Ukraine,” he said. “With a $30 trillion debt, America can’t afford to be the world’s policeman.” – source,

    DCSCA (0078ec)

  6. Elon Musk can edit hers.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  7. Morons sending 40 billion to Ukraine, instead of dealing with our issues.

    Every dime that doesn’t go to a Biden appointee is money well wasted.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  8. That list won’t convince Jankowicz of a flaw in her argument. Because the other half of it is that Giuliani, Cernovich, Greene, and Trump Jr. should be stripped of their blue check marks. Voilà, no more problem.

    Eliot (e7d960)

  9. ‘Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) had called on both Republicans and Democrats “to help us pass this urgent [$40 billion Ukraine] funding bill today…’


    Poverty in Kentucky

    What is the poverty rate in Kentucky?

    The poverty rate in Kentucky is 18.3%. One out of every 5.5 residents of Kentucky lives in poverty.

    How many people in Kentucky live in poverty?

    783,586 of 4,287,887 residents reported income levels below the poverty line in the last year.

    How does the Poverty Rate in Kentucky compare to the national average?

    Kentucky ranks 47th in Poverty Rate at 18.3% .The Poverty Rate of Kentucky is meaningfully higher than the national average of 14.6%.

    “Storm the castle.”

    DCSCA (988388)

  10. Supposed conservatives want fiscal responsibility. How is borrowing 40 billion from china and giving it to ukraine fiscally responsible? We are a schiff hole nation thanks to you 81 million. All to cover up the money laundering by our elected hacks in the Ukraine and Russia. Joe his family and you 81 million turncoats should be ashamed.

    mg (8cbc69)

  11. I see all the putin supporters are infesting this blog. You remind me of the nazi bundists here before world war II

    asset (576857)

  12. Geez, we didn’t even make it to the second comment before the thread got hijacked. As a reminder, mg and DCSCA, this post is not about Biden’s funding bill but rather a possible censorship by the government and chosen individuals. I’d appreciate at least pretending you’re interested in that (for at least one comment).

    Dana (5395f9)

  13. This is such an amazingly horrible idea by Jankowicz. Free speech is wonderful, but some ideas need to be marinated, exposed to private criticism, re-thought, re-packaged, and sometimes buried in a deep hole (hello Roseanne Barr and those who don’t think twice). Not every thought has to or should be shared with the planet. I think this “verified” Twitter-police is one of them. Yes, I get that people want to counter false and deceptive narratives…they are frustrated, but that’s done in part by factually exposing claims, not manipulating content based on earning some questionable blue check mark.

    But I also get the exasperation with Twitter and the volume of hot takes that are out there. It might take two lifetimes to counter every troll’s slanted messaging….and as team Trump has shown, there is a willing rabble out there who will believe anything. I’m not sure what the answer is. I’m no fan of Twitter because of the volume of manure and its lowering of the quality of discourse. It’s also addictive and increasingly mean spirited. Why do that to yourself? As we see daily, you don’t have to be right to sidetrack a discussion, just persistent and more invested.

    AJ_Liberty (a36eed)

  14. @14 yeah guys, let’s focus on one idiotic thing the 81 million voted for

    not the laundry list of idiotic things

    JF (1a8e05)

  15. Geez, we didn’t even make it to the second comment before the thread got hijacked.

    Oh! They weren’t just giving examples of self-appointed International Men of Mystery, operating one-person volunteer Fifth Columns to spread disinformation, defeatism, and pro-Russian propaganda of the kind Nina Jankowicz’s section of DHS was originally meant to identify, in order to give themselves some sense of significance?

    nk (1d5cfe)

  16. @17 sez someone who also thought the hunter laptop was russian disinformation

    JF (1a8e05)

  17. Heh! I will not be derailed.

    I suspect that we’re on the same page on Nina Jankowicz, though. That she is a “who do you know?” not a “what do you know?”. The daughter, “niece”, or “protege” of someone with clout in the Democrat political horde. You know … patronage.

    nk (1d5cfe)

  18. Can I get a harrumph?

    nk (1d5cfe)

  19. Doesn’t the Director of Disinformation know that the Twitter comment section already exists where any user can respond to a specific tweet with their own thoughts?

    Twitter users can “block” people from commenting on their tweets, and even from seeing them while logged in (which many devices do automatically.\\With the exception of politicians like Doonald Trump. Trump was sued and it was held to be a government publication or something – so that it would violate their first amendment rights to forbid them from commenting.

    You could have a way to highlight comments from some people, like comments from Patterico are here, but it would only be as good as the people selecte

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  20. One of the things the Department of Homeland Security considers disinformation is that anyone can come to the United States and stay. That is what the smugglers tell people, they say.

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  21. The most commonly censored ting is anything about health. Some don;t want anything not authoried by the CDC and the FDA.

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  22. @14. Unintended, Dana; just responding to mg; the $40 billion battle just staggers. The department of disinformation effort seems discredited and doomed out of the gate.

    DCSCA (03fa3a)

  23. The whole “blue check” thing is badly abused.

    I think the best you can say of the mark is that the owner is who he presents as being. “Cis”, if you like. It allows others to parody or pretend without defrauding the public. Shawn Spicer is checked. Sean Spicier is not. The “Disinformation Governance Board” is checked. The “US Ministry of Truth” is not. But neither Spicer nor the DGB is particularly expert or qualified in making pronouncements.

    If we ARE going to rely on some sort of credential, we also need a way to distinguish when the credentialed expert is speaking ex cathedra or biding precedent with all the authority due the position, versus when comments are just dicta or opinion. Ted Cruz, like him or not, sometimes speaks sense from his education and experience on topics relating to SCOTUS and constitutional law. And sometimes he blows foul smoke for political purposes on matters where he’s no more informed than anyone — or even less so. It would be useful if all of those of us following him (for one reason or another) could indicate our interpretation of which sort of speech he’s making.

    Pouncer (e0dbbb)

  24. harrumph

    mg (8cbc69)

  25. Dana -it should have gone to the weekend post, my odious error.

    mg (8cbc69)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1609 secs.