You Follow?


Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and US President Donald Trump

President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies today, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters, a move that comes as the president and his allies have escalated their allegations that companies like Twitter and Facebook stifle GOP voices.

“Big Tech is doing everything in their very considerable power to CENSOR in advance of the 2020 Election. If that happens, we no longer have our freedom,” Trump tweeted last nightt to his 80 million Twitter followers, after sounding the same theme more than 14 hours earlier. “I will never let it happen! They tried hard in 2016, and lost. Now they are going absolutely CRAZY. Stay Tuned!!!”

Trump to sign executive order on social media amid Twitter furore (Politico)




Twitter’s fact checker Yoel Roth in 2017.


Twitter exec in charge of effort to fact-check Trump has history of anti-Trump posts, called McConnell a ‘bag of farts’ (Fox News)

Sponsored Link

129 thoughts on “You Follow?

  1. Tony O'Leary

    I think it’s fan-bloody-tastic that Trump supporters are LESS angry about the fact that Donald Trump posted an inaccurate tweet than they are with the fact that it was fact-checked.

  2. spider

    A dictator taking control of the media… never heard the likes of it before! Oh wait…

  3. NobleLocks

    The increasingly radical left (Twitter & youtube) has completely lost the run of itself with it’s cancel culture. When you stop free speech because it hurts your feelings, you force it to find other ways to express itself. The other opinion is important even when we don’t like it.

    I hate Trump but denying free speech is an anathema to progress and must be stopped. The leftie whingers in Twitter are going up against the ego of bad man orange. Interesting times ahead.

    1. Joe cool

      With freedom of speech comes great responsibility. The orange one is talking out his hoop with some of the untruths he talks. If the shoe was on the other foot it would be a different story.

      1. spider

        The man had freedom of speech… he lied & was called out on it… now he’s trying to limit that freedom for others (in this case twitter)…

        1. NobleLocks

          And you think that Twitter is a bastion of truth and free speech? If you have a twitter account here are two little words that can get you permanently banned when said to the wrong person: “OK Dude”. Blimey mate you’ve a lot to learn.

          Regardless, the fracturing of the US continues at an unheard of pace and the lurch to the left of the media in the US has been quite profound. The California based Social Media companies are so far to the left now it’s hilarious (witness OK dude is a classic example).

          Trump didn’t win the election, Hillary lost it because the majority of American’s still don’t want the terror of identity politics and cancel culture to prevail… and I for one stand with them. I hate Trump, but he’s better than the “I’m litterally a communist” 20 million dead and every country’s economy destroyed left alternative.

          1. Nigel

            ‘The terror of identity politics.’

            Bloody hell when did we get so bloody stupid about politics? Bad and all as the social media sites are – and they’re terrible in all sorts of ways – you want someone like Trump to pass laws controlling them? You’re an idiot.

    2. millie in handcuffs

      Using “leftie whingers” and “bad man orange” are some fairly interesting buzzwords to indicate otherwise.

      But Twitter has a usage policy and Trump should be adhering to it, but he frequently doesn’t. The office he holds doesn’t (or shouldn’t) make him exempt from the rules that apply to everyone else.

      1. NobleLocks

        To be clear: I resided very much on the left of the spectrum for the first 30 years of my life. I believe in free speech and the right to express yourself without fear or favour. I believe that all people should be treated equally and no one should receive special treatment or privileges.

        Then somewhere along the line, the left took a massive lurch further into the left and literally left me behind.
        “It’s not discrimination when it’s positive discrimination” Yes it bloody well is discrimination.
        “You don’t know you you’re biased because it’s unconscious bias”. Only a biased person would say that.
        “That’s not politically correct” – lazy whingers talk for “I don’t like what you are saying and cannot argue with you so I’ll use cancel culture to shut you up.

        All of these things happened and I looked in the mirror and realised that I hadn’t changed, the left had. They had gone into a realm of identity politics where the most important thing about you was not who you were as an individual, but the colour of your skin!!! Exactly the opposite of what MLK preached against.

        The left created a hierarchy of oppression and used it as a tool to shut up those who had an opinion that differs from theirs.
        The left called everyone who was an inch to the right of Stalin an alt-right nazi. Only a totalitarian real nazi would do that
        The left created ANIFA as a front for actual terrorism – political gain through violent is the definition of Terrorism.
        The left created a system of discussion where stating the fact that a man cannot be a woman is considered hate speech rather than a simple biological fact (ala the emporers new clothes syndrome).

        I do not reside on the left any more. I don’t reside on the right either. The right have acted like complete numbties at times too. But the discourse today is dominated by massive companies who have been completely consumed by leftist propaganda and who openly cancel free speech for anyone they don’t like and that’s just bullpoopy.

        1. millie in handcuffs

          Thanks for the clarification. Not sure I agree with your position necessarily, but I can certainly understand where you’re coming from. I would imagine you are far from alone in it either.

        2. Art Vandelay

          You’re clearly on the right. Just trying (badly) to hide it. The amount of waffle you tied to the *entire* left above from being totalitarian nazis and terrorists and the best you could come up with for the right is “acted like complete numbties (sic) at times.”

          Must try harder.

          1. NobleLocks

            Thank you for proving my point Art. And I love the condemnation of “on the right”, it’s dripping with the pejorative.

            I had a go at the left for their deeply dangerous behaviour which is not being called out for what it is (witness ANTIFA) and the best you can do is criticise without addressing a single point and a bunch of, really rather pathetic whataboutery?

            And I’m the one who must try harder?

            (gratuitous taunting)

          2. Art Vandelay

            Dude, whatever bot you’re using to write these replies needs some tweaking, you’re embarrassing yourself.

            I proved your point? Lol. “On the right” is a pejorative term now? Where is my condemnation of the right? All right snowflake, triggered much?

            I didn’t address anything you said when its as clear as day you’re clearly pretending to have whatever persona it is that you’re portraying.

            I suggest you also look up the definition of both “a bunch” and “whataboutery” and point out to me where any of that happened in the original reply. Maybe you actually are on the left seeing as you’re triggered so much and defending yourself by replying to things that didn’t happen.

            And yes, you really must try harder. Or the bot does. Either one just to give your posts some semblance of believability

          3. Who am I now

            + Art
            is there anything worse than some self-hating former leftie (or more sanctimonious)?

    3. Enn

      They fact-checked. They didn’t delete the tweet. It wasn’t censorship. It was fact-checking.

      Wt actual f is wrong with people.

        1. class wario

          Twitter have routinely shown themselves to be extremely soft on the absolute worst people on the website while dishing out bans to others for being rude to them. The idea that they are on some new crusade to shut down these people is hilariously misguided and basically only being pushed as part of the wider right wing grift. These new ‘fact checking’ measures are the most milquetoast thing possible and follow years of enabling fascists on their own website to keep traffic up. What is your issue with them demonstrating how literally nothing supports the right wing lie that allowing people to vote more easily causes voter fraud to explode? Do you not realise how ridiculous it sounds to support somebody actively lying to people like that? If an Irish politician were caught out in a less severe way there would be a post on here within hours. It’s bonkers. Also do you think somebody having opinions discounts them for arbitrating on anything forever more? Is calling somebody a ‘bag of farts’ that outrageous? It’s lame at best.

        2. Harry Robertson

          Free speech isn’t it? As Enn said, they fact checked him not censored him.

          To be honest the conspiracy theories he’s spreading about Joe Scarborough is a joke. Now, they should be deleted and any amount of tweets from Jack doesn’t wash that from the stain on his or his company’s hands.

          1. Harry Robertson

            Considering Trump and his son said they would take help from anywhere to beat Hilary plus Trumps call to hack Hillary and the emergence of news of Russian SM troll farms. I think firstly, it’s fuel to the fire and an investigation was rightly carried out.

          2. Nigel

            Yeah, Bodger, remember when you celebrated Barr claiming the Mueller report exonerated Trump and the Russia thins was a hoax after all, and then a week later the report came out and it said excatly the opposite? Good times, false equivilancies in Trump’s favour, fake objectivity.

    4. Nigel

      Just to lay down a marker – starting with the basic premise that YouTube and Twitter are radical left is obvious absolute boo boos, so everything that follows from that premise is also absolute obvious boo boos.

      1. SOQ

        Depends on how you define ‘left’. Back in the day it was a worker’s right to a decent living, health care, pregnant women keeping their jobs etc.

        Now it appears to be where every gorilla in a frock can claim they are opposites sex, workplace ‘representation’ without qualifications or experience and Trócaire- oh yes- protesting against free speech.

        The ‘left’ have become radicalised Nigel- so much so they will soon disappear up their own over educated into stupidity backside.

        1. Nigel

          ‘where every gorilla in a frock can claim they are opposites sex’

          Please, go jump in a lake.

          And, yes, it does depend how you define ‘left,’ especially if your definition is nonsensical alt-right culture war garbage. Trump is literally trying to shut down a private company for pointing out he’s lying when he’s lying, in the most gentle and ineffective way, and you’re worried about the radical concept that trans people might get treated like actual human beings.

    5. Dr.Fart

      only 10:18am and we already have the stupidest take. That must free you up for the rest of the day, NobleLocks?

    6. Daisy Chainsaw

      Twitter and You Tube are private companies that don’t have to abide by American standards of “free speech” so they can do what they like. If people don’t like Twitter’s rules, they can leave.

      1. Bodger

        Daisy, Twitter (and YouTube) are acting like publishers even though they have been granted legal immunity on what they publish. Now they can get sued like the rest of us. @Jack walked into this one, in fairness.

  4. class wario

    Trump cultists have very much revealed themselves as supporting anything, however contrary to their apparent beliefs, provided Trump supports it and it would ‘own the libs’.

    Quite funny seeing them developing this extremely esoteric, illusory concept of ‘truth’ or ‘facts’ now though all the same

      1. millie in handcuffs

        For what? Was it the cats in tights post? Because I can’t say I disagree with them if it was. A sight that cannot be unseen.

      2. class wario

        Speaking of unrelated questions:

        – why did Broadsheet methodically block seemingly every even slightly left leaning Irish person on Twitter last year?
        – why did Broadsheet approvingly retweet a chart from a National Party stooge around GE time this year claiming that all parties bar the far right ones wanted to import rape gangs and turn children trans?

        1. V'ness

          Don’t know what you’re getting at there Wario

          They retweet that Mick Caul lad as much as anyone

          And I can point directly to a hard left Irish Twitter account that blocks all round them in the –
          and I’ll use NobelLocks describer Radical Left because that’s what they’d like to be thought of

          Speaking of which the Irish Radical Left are more occupied falling out amongst themselves than developing any cohesion or strength
          And they definitely are more consumed in exposing their own members behaviour and relationships and thoughts than anything else
          Especially on Twitter

          Just saying

        2. Ringsend Incinerator

          “every even slightly left leaning Irish person on Twitter”

          What? All 12 million?

      3. Nigel

        Does that make you Trump supporters? Or show that Twitter is actually quite arbitrary about its rules and enforcement and Trump’s bluster is yet another cynical right wing effort to shut down criticism?

        1. Bodger

          An algorithm that detects certain words? There was limited visibility on many of our tweets during the abortion referendum and the last General Election. And during the Disclosures Tribunal.

      4. Art Vandelay

        They’ve blackballed you ever since that leather jacket guy. Quite right too!

  5. Termagant

    It should be the right & responsibility of each individual to decide for themselves what they think is true or false, not a corporation’s.

    1. Nigel

      Trump’s actions will almost certainly narrow the definition of what’s true, as channeled by social mediafor now but he’s not likely to stop there, to something closer to his own. The individual versus vast amounts of corporate money and paranoid political power that cannot abide criticism? The individual doesn’t stand a bloody chance.

    2. class wario

      Facts over feelings! Destroyed with facts and logic!

      *30 seconds later*

      there is no such thing as absolute truth or reality and the only relevant truth is the ones personal truth

        1. Nigel

          The alternative to Trump controlling the political content of social media platforms is NOT Twitter deciding what is absolute truth. It’s just not an issue, not in the cards.

          1. Termagant

            Well that’s what’s happening Nigel. There was a third way, where Twitter kept themselves to themselves, but that’s gone now. The second they decided to shape how the content posted on their platform would be received they became propagandists.

          2. Nigel

            What does that mean, kept themselves to themselves? They have no right to regulate content on the platform they own? The issue isn’t whether they regulate but how, and since there are still Nazis on Twitter, they’re terrible at it. This is such typical right-wing whining made incredibly dangerous with the addition of reckless abuse of political power.

          3. Termagant

            “The issue isn’t whether they regulate”
            It is, and if it was people on your side of the line being ‘regulated’ you’d understand that, but you actively enjoy being blinded by politics, so there’s no hope for you.

          4. Nigel

            ‘People on your side of the line’ oh feck off with that nonsense. Twitter’s regulation is sloppy and uneven and inconsistent in all sorts of ways, but if the people on Trump’s side of the line are being regulated disporpotionately (and there is no actual proof that they are) then it’s worth bearing in mind that the people on Trump’s side of the line are off the feckin hook. There’s a whole insane pro-Trump conspiracy cult that routinely accuses his critics and any number of random celebrities as being part of child-abusing baby eating satanic cult!

          5. Termagant

            “it’s all right to do it to them because they’re the bad guys”
            From your perspective. And Jack’s, apparently.

          6. Nigel

            Are you suggesting that there is some objective way in which these specific people are ‘good?’ Significantly, though, said people are thriving on Twitter, and on YouTube, and on Facebook, so you and Trump are literally talking absolute balls.

        2. class wario

          not really, the legions of ‘fact checkers’ out there have proven totally toothless to date and twitter itself doubly so. they should just boot off all the fascists instead of trying to ‘convince’ people. but it is funny to see the facts over feelings people suddenly do a full 180, especially with something like this which has proven time and time again to be a total lie

    3. Art Vandelay

      Didnt they do that by providing more information? So then a person gets to read both and then they decide?

  6. Johnny

    Twitter is a private company,the first amendment protects individuals against censorship by the GOVT not by private companies.

    Twitter doesn’t even sell political ads,he has no levergae,its too small for anti-trust,it can moderate whatever it wants.

    100,000 dead yesterday,in 100 days since first death, you can’t censor that…..or sign a useless EO-executive order.

    1. Bodger

      Johnny, these companies are afforded privileges and protection traditional media are denied because they are meant to be be public platforms ‘without editorial input’. Those privileges can and should be revoked.

      1. Nigel

        Yeah, I’d say a Trumpist reform of social media will be a great dawning moment of freedom rather than a tightening of the screws and and a whole new era of dominant right-wing propaganda.

        1. broadbag

          Our Jewish fact checker thinks you’re a nazi but will be completely impartial when judging your tweets, doesn’t ring true somehow.

          1. Nigel

            Either the fact-checker is doing their job accurately, or they are not. Who the hell’s going to be objective about Trump? They wanted a horrible, trolling, polarising figure, they got one. Sucks to be them.

          2. broadbag

            class wario – Are you saying you can’t see the relevance of him being Jewish when he’s mentioning Nazis? Baffling! But sure just scream ‘anti-semite’ and shut down the debate, well done.

          3. Nigel

            Peak Trump-world politics – criticising Jewish people for not being objective about Nazis.

          4. SOQ

            Actually Peak Trump- world politics- is being accused of being a Nazi when his daughter, son-in-law and ALL his political advisers are Orthodox Jews- but do carry on.

          5. Nigel

            It seems the person having trouble with the reality of Trumpworld is yourself. Nazis love him. His family has Jewish members. Don’t shoot the messenger.

        2. Daisy Chainsaw

          It doesn’t matter that his son in law is Jewish. He prefers having Jews involved in his finances.

          “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.”

          Trump has regularly implied that American Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the United States and that they are essentially foreign guests in this country: At the White House Hanukkah party in December, he told the assembled American Jews that Israel was “your country.”

 If you want to fact check.

      2. Aegis

        @Bodger, Editorial input means editing the content.Twitter pointing out that this whole mail ballots thing from Trump is misleading is not editorial input. Twitter still affords Trump a full platform to rant on.

        You seem to be missing the point that Trump is now threatening to limit free speech.

          1. Nigel

            He, a politician, wants to exert legal control over the political content of Twitter. How is that not antithetical to free speech? And the reason he’s doing it is that his lies and conspiracy-mongering are so blatant even bloody Twitter felt it had to the bare minimum to draw attention to it.

          2. Termagant

            He wants to prevent Twitter from sticking their corporate and decidedly partial oar in, it’s nothing to do with the content posted by Twitter’s users

          3. Nigel

            Whatever about the corporate control of the flow of and access to information, the Trumpian control of information is going to be radically worse, and I can’t see how anyone can argue otherwise, unless they completely ignore the nature of Trump in the name of a kind of faux-objectivity.

          4. Termagant

            “the Trumpian control of information is going to be radically worse”
            How so? What exactly is it that you think he’s going to do?

          5. Nigel

            Try to shut down criticism of himself in any and every way that he can, if he’s allowed to get away with it. Threaten and bluster where he can’t in an effort to scare people into silence.

          6. Termagant

            Why do you think that? He’s trying to force Twitter as an entity to be neutral, there’s no reason to believe he’s going to say anything about content posted on it.

          7. Nigel

            You seriously just said that Trump is making a good-faith effort to enforce poltical neutrality on Twitter? Did you accuse me of beng blinded by politics in another comment? Because Jesus Christ you’re just insulting your own intelligence as well as everyone else’s.

          8. Termagant

            Remain calm, Nigel. It’s by all means in his favour, I understand that, but the distinction I’m trying to convey to you here is political messaging on the part of the people using the platform vs. political messaging on the part of the people who run the platform. It’s nothing to do with who Trump is, if you think I’m being partisan here you’ve got even bigger problems then I thought.

          9. Nigel

            Except it isn’t political messaging, it’s Trump’s violations of Twitter’s terms and services being so frequent, blatant, outrageous and egregious that they decided to to make an absolute bare-minimum cowardly-compromise effort to adress it, and his predictably treating that as an attack on his freedom of speech and various idiots actually believing him and thinking it’s a good idea for him to ‘enforce neutrality.’

          10. Termagant

            There’s no point in continuing this discussion. Yes, Trump is evil, the huge corporations only have everyone’s best interests at heart, you can tell by how they agree with your team, the objectively correct team. Your complex is too deeply entrenched, Nigel, I can’t assail it so I’ll stop trying

          11. Nigel

            Trump is evil, corporations don’t have our best interests at heart, Trump + corporations is sure to lead to the shining uplands of truth and freedom!

          12. Aegis


            “Donald Trump is preparing to sign an executive order that could erode legal protections for social media companies for content posted on their platforms.

            The move would also allow federal regulators and state-level prosecutors to sanction companies that in the government’s judgment are not even-handed in their editorial practices.”

            The answer for you is “everyone”.

      3. Johnny

        Bodger,Twitter is a private company the only censorship proposed here is by the GOVT (Trump) in trying regulate/censor them by issuing an EO !

        There is not a chance his EO-executive order-changes anything,its more an abuse of power issue by POTUS than a first amendment or free speech issue.

        Its not his “privilege to revoke”-he’s not our King,we have a constitution and courts.

        I don’t think this is a section 230 issue.

        “Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which was passed in 1996, says an “interactive computer service” can’t be treated as the publisher or speaker of third-party content. This protects websites from lawsuits if a user posts something illegal, although there are exceptions for copyright violations, sex work-related material, and violations of federal criminal law.”

  7. broadbag

    Big mistake by Twitter here, adding fuel to the fire for conspiracy hounds, many of whom are pro-Trump, just pushes more of their ilk towards Trump = more votes. How many Democrat tweets have they flagged over the years? Finally, I will try to use ‘bag of farts’ in conversation at least once today.

    1. Nigel

      You can’t add fuel to an oil refinery. Maybe Democrat tweets don’t get flagged because they’re not so full of flagrantly awful lies?

  8. Fintan Frobisher

    I’ve never used any social media.
    Twitter is not real life.The people who think it is are exactly why I avoid it.
    But I do occasionally read tweets of people who I respect or who make me laugh.
    One of whom is this chap.He introduced me to the expression frothy clopper for which I am for ever grateful.

    Other than that I hope Orange Man Bad goes after Dorsey in a big way.He’s quite clearly trying to influence the presidential election.

    1. V'ness

      And yet your crowd made the most of it

      But you’re right about Dorsey tho

      Although everyone with a platform, no matter what it is or what use it is
      Is trying to influence the US Presidential Election

      shur here, look at me at it now
      Don’t Vote for *Trump
      Don’t Vote for Biden either

      and only because Mike Pence is waiting for the eejit to keel over into his quarter pounders with cheese, and that’s a very dangerous prospect plus 4 years – at least

      1. Nigel

        ‘Don’t Vote for *Trump
        Don’t Vote for Biden either’

        Ah yes, the lazy arrogance of centrism.

        1. Ghost of Yep

          … you back Biden? Cause he isn’t Trump? And question other peoples rationale? Amazing.

          1. Nigel

            That’s it. That’s the choice. Nobody else is running. It’s binary, one or the other. Not choosing is a cop-out and, since low turnout always benefits the right, de facto Trump support. So yes, since it’s Trump vs Biden, Biden all the way, whatever my reservations or misgivings about his nomination.

          2. Ghost of Yep

            Do you have a vote?

            See how you did that though? Pushed clear flaws to the back because of your disdain for the other candidate. If people do that in reverse you mock and belittle.

            There is a third option. Don’t vote.

            It really annoys me the amount of “did you hear what Trump said?” that happens in this country with people who don’t have a breeze about how our government or the EU functions. Sad ;)

          3. Nigel

            No I don’t have a vote, but I never claimed I did. Those are the choices. Weigh up their good and bad points, and pick one. Or sit on the fence, I guess, see where that gets you.

          4. Ghost of Yep

            Depending on the State or how close the vote is it will get to exactly the same place if you voted. At least then you won’t have to engage in this morally corrupt and facile nonsense that somehow one man being the leader of one country can make the world a better place. Or even that country.

            I think sitting on a porch in the shade watching people throw poo at each other over a fence is the perfect spot for this election.

            I think you get all ramped up for this because you enjoy the sport of it all. That’s cool too Nidge. Have a good one.

          5. Nigel

            Sitting and watching other people do all the hard work of trying to make things better is is also morally corrupt and facile, to my mind. It’s all about preserving your own sense of superiority over the little people who actually care about things.

          6. Ghost of Yep

            “Sitting and watching other people do all the hard work of trying to make things better is is also morally corrupt and facile, to my mind.”

            What the sweet fupp are you on about? The “hard work” you talk about is me not having an opinion on an election in a democratic country I am not a citizen of?

            What hard work have you done?…Nothing of use I would imagine. Unless inflating your own self importance is a use.

            Actually, what do we do about China? We HAVE to do something, right? You would have to be a coward not to have an opinion on an authoritarian regime ruling over a billion people denying everyday freedoms and liberties afforded people in the West.

            I take it back. Don’t have a good one. Silly boo.

          7. Nigel

            But you do have an opinion and you have expressed it and have identified yourself as wallowing in smug lazy cyncism.

          8. Ghost of Yep #Trump2020

            You know what they say about opinions right?

            “Wallowing” You spend an incredible amount of time commenting and arguing on the internet about Trump. A subject you have no control over.

            I’d say you’re gas over a pint.

            “Smug” 90% of what I have read from you drips with thick glistening smugness.

            “Lazy” How so? If I work real hard will I see how awful Trump* is?

            “Cyncism” You’re not a cynic? World burning, global pandemic, economy crashing…But if I just feel hard enough Trump won’t win then everything will be ok?

            You have called many an idiot in this thread but I think your head is so up your derriere you can’t see a mirror. Metaphorically.

            *Complete ladypart. Hated him since Home Alone 2.

          9. Ghost of Yep

            You know what they say about opinions right?

            “Wallowing” You spend an incredible amount of time commenting and arguing on the internet about Trump. A subject you have no control over.
            I’d say you’re gas over a pint.

            “Smug” 90% of what I have read from you drips with thick glistening smugness.

            “Lazy” How so? If I work real hard will I see how awful Trump* is?

            “Cyncism” You’re not a cynic? World burning, global pandemic, economy crashing…But if I just feel hard enough Trump won’t win then everything will be ok?

            You have called many an idiot in this thread but I think your head is so up your derriere you can’t see a mirror. Metaphorically
            *Complete ladypart. Hated him since Home Alone 2.

          10. Nigel

            Yes, I know what they say about opinions – the bar is THAT low, and you still can’t clear it.

          11. Ghost of Yep

            The point Nigel is that the bar for opinions is that low for everyone. Hold it tight. Leave it loose. Same thing. Doesn’t matter…leave it SOQ.

            60%of the time i come here for a row too. I get it.

            Have a good one.

          12. Nigel

            Imagine thinking this way about your own opinions. You’ve been thoroughly gaslighted.

          13. Ghost of Yep

            The world is changed by your example not by your opinion.

            Past commenting on the internet, what have you done to help the lives of the people who need it?

        2. V'ness

          I’ve been called worse

          I say Don’t Vote for Trump
          because he isn’t Presidential in a way that demonstrates the interests of his constituents are his priority; Yet day in day out we are treated to a new gig for something Trump Inc & Family have their paws into

          I say Don’t Vote for Biden because he’s a Hack Candidate and a Lazy Choice,
          America must shurly have better candidates qualified to run on a Democratic ticket than him, there is no effing gumption left in the party of Bobby Kennedy
          Maybe if Julian Castro is added – I dunno, I might rally around, although he’s no Jimmy Carter either

          1. Nigel

            But you have opinions, and if your opinion is one is as bad as the other, you’re an awful bloody eejit.

          2. V'ness

            So what if I’ve opinions
            Or none

            Its up to the voter to inform themselves
            If they want to listen to me

            then so what, I’m not on the ballot in front of them
            I’m not paid to influence them
            I’m not inciting them to inflict harm
            I’m not selling anything or promoting anything to serve a private interest

            Any wider agendas I had were killed off with Frilly Keane

            everything else is already out there in the open
            And for which I am regulated and audited and accountable for anyway

            in the meantime, just in case there are US voters watching my every move
            here is something about postal voting in your respective constituencies


          3. Nigel

            When having an opinion is so consequence free and you still come down firmly in the middle.

          4. V'ness

            If anything it shows how insipid the race for one of, if not the, most powerful political jobs on the planet

            Not where my ar5e is

  9. Cian

    “Free Speech” in the USA resolves around the First Amendment to their constitution. It says:
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    This is there to protect the people from the Government.

    Or, in 2020 term: to protect Twitter from Trump.

    1. V'ness

      and Trump from Twitter

      Trumps biggest problem is himself
      not free speech, his attitude to women, minorities, his reluctance to work with any transparency
      or that he has the attention span of a Nespresso capsule
      Trump is the Trump 2020 Campaign and the Trump White House’s biggest risk

      not Twitter or Facebook or whatever yer having yerselves

      In fact we should just all shurrup and let them get on with it

  10. goldenbrown

    why can’t we just ban Politics completely from Chitter and Friendface?

    problem solved

    1. Orla

      This is the way forward instead of trusting the spoilt child zuckerberg to have massive sway of billions and expecting good to come out of it.

      Problem is politics is generating revenue for those platforms because people are addicted to the drama, a lot of folks with degrees don’t like fair city or eastenders and use twitter for a soap opera inclination humans seem to have, see Colette brown of independent news and media “curtain twitching” British politics as an example.

      Sincere facts and ambiguity are boring these days because of desensitization, the child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein story wasn’t alarming enough for some so they added the child sacrifice “adrenochrome” narrative.

  11. Orla

    Is it just 1 human fact checker making the final decision?
    You would think a team is necessary for each shift they are working with a sort of diplomatic vote, Are they “experts” and what “science” is Mr Roth selecting as “facts”.

    So many conflicting perceptions because humans still don’t fully understand what we are or the world around us, we still don’t know where memories are stored in the brain for example.
    Every perception is based on context ,clarifying your context helps understand your meanings ,this is why twitter claiming to be an independent platform with no political angle needs to be clarified, if it’s a business model then surely there is a economic bias and this needs to be stated.

    All this does is drive the left wing inclined to stay on twitter and right to move to a new platform, 2 echo chambers splintering off from the current eco chamber that will allow their views to be amplified without counter argument.

    Let’s see if Mr Roth will fact check Netanyahu when he is claiming to be an ally of America while being in bed with Russia and China, would Mr Roth have been as quick to question the weapons of mass destruction narrative for example?

    1. Nigel

      Many people fact-checked and questioned the weapons of mass destruction narrative but politicians, with the help of strident supporters, forced their version of reality through, which led us, logically, to Trump, who rearranges his perception of reality from sentence to sentence, enforced by hysterically enraged supporters and supine centrists who accept the assertion that to say Trump is lying when he lies is to attack his freedom of speech and show political bias. Since that’s the sort of behaviour that got us Iraq War 2, where might this lead us?

      1. Orla

        Most politicians are lying that’s the bigger issue, the thing about instant fact checking Via twitter is the effect of latent falsehoods, this sets twitter up to be further discredited down the line.
        A lie makes it around the world etc is well known by those in power.
        Politicians know we know they’re lying yet everyone continues the charade for the drama fix.

        Where it leads potentially is divisiveness which weakens the United States, the same divisiveness could dissolve the euro which sends nation states back into a weaker state, China,Russia and Israel benefit from this.
        The more alarming realization is most of his support is a protest vote, people for the most part know he’s nuts, the media constantly show red necks supporting him for the narrative, most folks won’t say in certain circles they are voting for him because of the backlash.

        People worldwide need to focus more on the financial system ,it’s how these clowns hold so much sway ,journalist’s should be doing more to translate the language of the banking cult for the layman.

  12. Johnny

    Most Americans could care less about Twitter or Fox who’s viewership is similar proportionally to TV3.
    -around 2.5 million people watch Fox in prime time out of 350 million !

    “Barack Obama is currently the most followed account on Twitter with over 112 million followers”

    “There are 262 million International Twitter users (users outside the US) which make up 79% of all Twitter accounts.”

    “80% of Twitter users are affluent millennials.”

    What Americans do care about this morning is this…protests and riots in Minneapolis, Los Angeles and Memphis as hundreds of people gather in a call for justice over the death of George Floyd.These have the potential to spread to many major cities in US-the place is like a tinderbox fook twitter,who cares some rich millenniums!

  13. Ringsend Incinerator

    Posturing again by the pathetic self-absorbed and over-rated and over-paid San Francisco tech brigade bros…

    Dorsey is right up there in favour of Trump’s “business-friendly” economic policies. I think you will also find that Trump is/was a WAAAAY better businessman than Dorsey and Friends will ever be,,,

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link