Did Twitter have to make these changes in the face of life-threatening Covid disinfo? YES.
They're a private company, we are guests. We're not the paying customer, advertisers are.
They have every right to try to stamp out domestic terrorism & related anti public health BS.
They're a private company, we are guests. We're not the paying customer, advertisers are.
They have every right to try to stamp out domestic terrorism & related anti public health BS.
https://twitter.com/BreakerFNM/status/1448002738130980865
All the major social media platforms have the same problem: how to lawfully try to reduce harm while maximizing the success of a product funded by advertisers (ie NOT you or me.)
It's not easy for them. To make it easier for you, think about WHY they are doing it.
It's not easy for them. To make it easier for you, think about WHY they are doing it.
Twitter isn't here as a public service or a charity. They are here to earn a profit for shareholders. Unless you want to live in a totalitarian state (whether communist or far right fascist) then it pays to remember these facts.
Free market capitalism works. IMO it's fairer.
Free market capitalism works. IMO it's fairer.
We can have a discussion about political systems (as long as it's civil) but I'm just reminding y'all about the way social media has always worked. I started using it in the 1980s. I soon learned that the owner of the site makes the rules. They have to.
Notice who is complaining about this latest change as if it threatens their "free speech rights."
If they're in the US they should re-read the 1st Amendment, in context of the Constitution as a whole.
It binds GOVERNMENT not companies.
If they're in the US they should re-read the 1st Amendment, in context of the Constitution as a whole.
It binds GOVERNMENT not companies.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
