Top Channels
Search Results By Hashtag
Comments (0)
    Added post  to  , Twitter

    : Executive Details Plans for Political on a Global Scale in Recording Obtained By Project Veritas”

    at link

    Added post  to  , Twitter

    This is Twitter, remind me why conservatives still use the platform?

    Doxing is allowed as long as its a conservative you are harming, but do not every protest outside a liberals house.

    Added news  to  , Twitter

    Twitter has written “shadow banning” aka, censorship, into their new terms.  The platform will now intentionally “limit the visibility” of some users. Expect those who dissent from the official narrative to be the ones censored.

    Critics have accused Twitter of censorship for quite some time now.  But this time, it’s official. The company has admitted they will attempt to silence those critical of the ruling class. According to RT, the news terms will be taking effect in January of 2020. While the new terms don’t look like much to write home about, some tweaks to the language could have larger repercussions for users, limiting their reach behind the scenes without their knowledge.

    “We may also remove or refuse to distribute any Content on the Services, limit distribution or visibility of any Content on the service, suspend or terminate users, and reclaim usernames without liability to you,” the new terms state.

    The social media giant is telling users that it reserves the right shadow ban or “throttle” or censor certain accounts. And it is not clear on what basis will it make those decisions, although we guess (based on their past which is rife with censorship) that accounts that aren’t parroting the government’s official narrative will be on the list.

    While Twitter has previously insisted point-blank “we do not shadow ban,” in the pre-2020 terms the company split hairs between shadow banning and “ranking” posts to determine their prominence on the site, and acknowledged deliberately down-ranking “bad-faith actors” to limit their visibility.

    In January 2018, conservative media watchdog group Project Veritas published footage showing Abhinov Vadrevu, a former Twitter software engineer, discussing shadow banning as a “strategy” the company was at least considering, if not already using. “One strategy is to shadow ban so you have ultimate control. The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don’t know they’ve been banned because they keep posting and no one sees their content,” Vadrevu said. “So they just think that no one is engaging with their content when in reality, no one is seeing it.”

    The new terms will make shadow bans an official policy, all but guaranteeing continued cries of bias and censorship from the platform’s many critics will be silenced.

    Authored by Mac Slavo via,

    Added news  to  , Twitter

    Google has recently joined Twitter in prohibiting political advertisers from targeting voters based on political affiliation. The company said the new measure is aimed at promoting trust in electoral processes worldwide.

    Twitter’s ban on political ads came into force today, but the company’s new policy has raised more questions than answers since the platform unveiled details of it on 15 November.

    What’s the policy?

    Twitter said that it would prohibit the promotion of political content, as the company’s CEO Jack Dorsey said they believe that “political message reach should be earned, not bought”. Announcing the company’s decision to ban political ads on its platform on 30 October, Dorsey said the power of Internet advertising poses risks to politics, “where it can be used to influence votes to affect the lives of millions”.

    What does Twitter define as political content?

    The company said that starting from 22 November, content that refers to a candidate, a political party, elected or appointed government official, election, referendum, ballot measure, legislation, regulation, directive or judicial outcome will be deemed political. Advertisements that contain references to political content, including calls to vote for a certain candidate or party, solicitations of financial support and advocacy for or against any type of political content mentioned above would be banned from its platform. The company said that candidates, political parties, elected or appointed government officials will also be banned.

    Are there any exemptions from the ban?

    Twitter said that news publishers that comply with the company’s criteria “may run ads that reference political content and/or prohibited advertisers under our political content policy”, but they cannot include advocacy for or against those topics or advertisers.

    Issue ads

    Twitter has also made a U-turn on issue ads, namely ads that are intended to bring awareness to certain problems. Announcing Twitter’s decision to ban political ads on the platform, CEO Jack Dorsey said that they can be used to circumvent Twitter’s new policy, adding that it would be unfair if everyone except for politicians is able to buy ads to promote the issues they want.

    Since the announcement, the company has introduced changes to issuing ads requiring “advertiser certification for ads that educate, raise awareness, and/or call for people to take action in connection with civic engagement, economic growth, environmental stewardship, or social equity causes”.
    At the same time, these would be banned if they are used to advocate for or against a specific political, judicial, legislative or regulatory outcome.

    How does this work in practice? A non-profit organisation may buy an ad that tells about the benefits of vaccination, however, the ad can’t encourage the passage of some laws or direct people to the websites of certain candidates that support the measure.

    Twitter has also introduced several restrictions in this category. Ad targeting is limited and restricted to geo, interest targeting, and keywords. Keyword and interest targeting cannot use terms associated with political content, for example – conservative or liberal.

    Will it work?

    Twitter’s decision to ban political ads has received mixed reactions, with critics of the social media platform doubting it would be able to implement the new strategy, given its unimpressive record on banning hate speech and abuse on its website.

    Vijaya Godde, the legal, policy as well as trust and safety lead at Twitter, admitted that the company is prepared that it will “make some mistakes” and stressed that the platform is going to have to learn and improve its new strategy.

    Added news  to  , Twitter

    Twitter founder Jack Dorsey attacks Mark Zuckerberg saying he has a 'major gap' in his free speech argument and calls him out for his 'revisionist history' after he claimed Facebook was created in response to the Iraq War

    • Twitter founder Jack Dorsey dug into Mark Zuckerberg while speaking at the Twitter News Summit in New York City on Thursday
    • He criticized Zuckerberg's speech at Georgetown University delivered last week
    • Zuckerberg said Facebook will not ban political ads in the name of free speech 
    • Dorsey slammed Zuckerberg saying Facebook's paid promoted posts are a 'major gap and flaw' in his free speech argument
    • He called out Zuckerberg's claim Facebook was created in response to Iraq War
    • 'There's some amount of revisionist history in all his storytelling,' Dorsey said

    Read the full article on The Daily Mail.

    Added news  to  , Twitter

    A Virginia judge ruled this week that Rep. Devin Nunes can sue social media giant Twitter when he rejected the San Francisco company’s argument that the California congressman should not be able to pursue a lawsuit against it in the southern state.

    Judge John Marshall denied Twitter’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit from the Henrico County Circuit Court on Wednesday, as first reported by the Richmond Times-Dispatch. One of the defendants Nunes is suing in the case is a former Virginia resident. 

    “The plaintiff came from California to Virginia to pursue claims that arose in Virginia against defendants who were in Virginia,” Marshall’s letter says, according to the Times-Dispatch. “The causes of action in this case are interdependent and for the other reasons in this opinion the court will not dismiss the action against Twitter” on claims of inconvenience.

    This could be an ominous sign for other Social Media Platforms like Facebook have worked overtime to silence and eliminate conservative voices on their platforms.

    Devin Nunes sued Twitter for $250 million in damages for censoring conservatives back in March. Nunes claimed in the 40-page lawsuit, that Twitter sought to influence his 2018 reelection race and interfere with his investigation into Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and Russian involvement in the 2016 elections. Nunes oversaw that inquiry as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee — a role he held until Democrats officially retook the House in January.

    A Republican political consultant based in Arlington County, Virginia, Liz Mair, is responsible for a slew of defamatory statements about Nunes, the congressman claims, as well as two parody accounts impersonating his mother and a cow, the 22nd District Republican said.

    Some of the insults by the account @DevinNunesMom he describes as part of a “vicious defamation campaign” include allegations that he has “white supremacist friends,” that he is a “treasonous Putin shill,” and that he is “covering up Trump’s conspiracy against the United States.” Many of the tweets relayed in the complaint are lewd, including tweets depicting Nunes as a cocaine addict, as having a sexually transmitted disease and as having “engaged in sexual acts with the president.”

    Nunes, who grew up on a dairy farm in the San Joaquin Valley, said the account @DevinCow made a number of false statements about him while employing cattle puns, including that he is “udder-ly worthless and its pasture time to move him to prison.”

    A member of the House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee, Nunes accuses the defendants of working in concert to obstruct his investigations into “corruption and Russian involvement in the 2016 Presidential Election.”

    And Twitter actively participated in the scheme, Nunes claims. The platform censored or “shadow banned” his account in order to diminish his voice and “amplify the voices of his Democratic detractors,” and failed to enforce its terms of service by not banning the parody accounts, the congressman alleges.

    Twitter only banned the account @DevinNunesMom after the congressman’s real mother, Toni Dian Nunes, filed a complaint.

    A 2018 study by VICE News found that Twitter is censoring top pro-Trump lawmakers.

    Twitter’s troll hunt, however, has ensnared some of the most prominent Republicans in the country. Type in the names of McDaniel, conservative members of Congress like Reps. Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, and Matt Gaetz, and Trump Jr.’s spokesman Andrew Surabian, for example, and Twitter’s drop-down search bar does not show their profiles. The search menu also does not display the verified profile of Rep. Devin Nunes of California, only his unverified one that he seldom uses to post.

    Related: Laura Loomer gets Facebook to admit to being a Publisher.