Profile picture
, 9 tweets, 6 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
Nah, here is the problem... the word "I" appears 296 times in this transcript. answers about decisions that affect over 2 billion people.
In labeling instead of removing (aka "censoring") posts, he's literally fielding it as a new idea. That's certifiably nuts. @dcnorg's 2016 letter to Zuckerberg made point we didn't want to encourage removing harmful content and to put resources towards slowing down its spread.
and finally, in the real world of publishing where companies take responsibility (certainly news publishers) for their content and seek improving audience trust, there is a group responsible for content policy and normally they don't consult policy, revenue or CEO on decisions.
I mean look at the list:
Zuckerberg - $60B+ in $FB stock
Sheryl - ditto + former political operative
Nick - former MP, UK political operative
Joel - DC political animal
Bickert - misled Parliament on Cambridge Analytica, legal counsel on shutting down competitive apps controversy
I mean, this was Bickert and colleague Milner's testimony 36 days prior to all hell breaking loose and finding out Cambridge Analytica never actually deleted the tens of millions of Facebook personal data records they purchased and there was a massive cover-up.
and here are court docs from leaked discovery (ht NBC News @oliviasolon @cfarivar). I'm just having trouble understanding why this particular group of people with a long list of controversial past decisions get to decide what is best for the entire world. #loyalty #zuckerberg
More on Kaplan (ht @dseetharaman @JeffHorwitz @WSJ) wsj.com/articles/faceb… and wsj.com/articles/faceb…
and Nick Clegg ... yes, he's characterized as their global chief lobbyist so that's 2 lobbyists (Clegg and Kaplan) and 2 former US Govt (Sandberg and Bickert). Quite a group to decide whether to do something that will upset the political party in power. politico.eu/article/nick-c…
and then compare all of the above to how Twitter organizes these decisions (ht @WillOremus @ozm) I wonder how @evanspiegel @Snapchat made their decision, too.... onezero.medium.com/inside-twitter…
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Keep Current with Jason Kint

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Related hashtags

#loyalty #zuckerberg

More from @jason_kint see all

Profile picture
Jason #StayHome Kint
@jason_kint
These two May tweets will be studied for many years.
Twitter is showing leadership here. Make no mistake, this is not censorship. They’re a private platform and it’s a label. Quite a contrast to the failed leadership at the top of Facebook (and its Instagram).
Here is how it looks on Twitter’s mobile app. This is significant.
Read 9 tweets
Profile picture
Jason #StayHome Kint
@jason_kint
Lol. Missed this earlier today as it got zero traction. FB PR strategy is dying. Despite FB posting its propaganda to what it labels “newsroom”, tech reporters are avoiding sharing these blog posts. Instead they read, reference, use for company statements as they should. 🙏🏽
You can see FB execs @andymstone @guyro tried to give the post awareness. They also put their personal reputations on the line with the absurd claim WSJ reporters “willfully ignored critical facts” which is an absolute garbage attack of top reporters and editors in the business.
I predict that this bogus Facebook claim won’t age well. It’s on par with their threats to @guardian in 2018. Press reporters will keep their heads down and continue to be fair while Facebook will try to concoct and promote narrative that the industry press is out to get them.
Read 5 tweets
Profile picture
Jason #StayHome Kint
@jason_kint
I'll make a thread of Trump-defenders who wave their free speech flag but don't even understand how 1A only limits government speech and not private actors like Twitter. Not to mention Twitter only labeled the false info which we prefer rather than deleting it. here is @dbongino.
I mean c'mon here. not only are the issues practically non-existent but @GOPChairwoman here is claiming 83% without even noting her math is based on 5 of 6 incidents. ***5 of 6***. Twitter must be laughing at this nonsense. It's not even something which will make them revisit.
here is @TomFitton, again no legit arguments here. Twitter isn't picking any side except labeling what they determined to be a blatantly false claim which impacts election integrity. If anything they waited too long and I expect their concern about Trump's rage held them back.
Read 7 tweets

Embed code for your website

×
Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!