Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,049
- Location
- La France
Are we saying that the New York Post has printed a fake news article?
Social media (corporate) election interference and censorship
- Thread starter mmj_uk
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
Yes. They do it all the time. Hardly a reputable outlet.
I guess that's why Giuliani approached them with the story - he knew how important the news was and that an outlet in such standing would be the best way to disseminate it and be taken seriously.
When it comes to investigative reporting in America, NYT and Washington Post are the two obvious ones.
Crappy tabloid New York Post is a long way down the list.
So you have picked sites that have endorsed Democrats.
Now we know your agenda. And what is this American site you talk of?
Well the twitter CEO has backed tacked on everything after a Subpoena was issued.
That caught out him out
The New York Post can again be posted on twitter.
That's fine, but once these social media megacorporations become large and powerful enough to influence the result of elections, it becomes a problem.
I remember the Reddit CEO saying this a few years back:
“I’m confident that Reddit could sway elections. We wouldn’t do it, of course. And I don’t know how many times we could get away with it. But, if we really wanted to, I’m sure Reddit could have swayed at least this election, this once.”
Fast forward to now and they are trying their hardest to sway it at all costs.
But the only people who have given them that perceived power...are the people themselves!
Are private companies not allowed to favour or push for their favoured candidate? As if a massive cooperation using their influence to help their preferred candidate is ANYTHING new.
Look at the money and effort Bloomberg has gone to/put in for this election. Is he not allowed to do that?
No one and nothing is forcing anyone to use Facebook, Twitter, Reddit etc. If you find that company does not let you say what you want to say on their servers, then you can move on and not use them/not use the site or their product.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Christ, we agree on something.
Any legit facts/news just get buried under mountains of drivel from all sides of the fence.
I don't think it would be particularly democratic to limit communication channels during an election. I'm not sure the actual media are any better these days, although it could be argued that traditional news outlets have changed as a result of social media.
Twitter have since backtracked they never blocked it because it was "fake news" they did so using the justification that the emails were hacked, which is not the case and even if it was why didn't they take the same stance when it came to Trump's tax returns?
Joe Biden stands accused of potentially being involved in his sons schemes of taking money for political favours from foreign businesses and individuals in China, Russia and Ukraine. However the information was obtained all that should matter to the electorate is whether it is true or not. You aren't going to find that out when you have corporate media taking zero interest and/or censoring it because it hurts the corporate candidate.
Joe Biden stands accused of potentially being involved in his sons schemes of taking money for political favours from foreign businesses and individuals in China, Russia and Ukraine. However the information was obtained all that should matter to the electorate is whether it is true or not. You aren't going to find that out when you have corporate media taking zero interest and/or censoring it because it hurts the corporate candidate.
And yet they do not seem to want to report on this story. Or indeed with social media companies arbitrarily blocking a story about potentially criminal activities of an American political clan.
Is it to late for the democrats to bin bidden? As even if he is elected, this could neuter his presidency and potentially damage trust in the party for many many years.
it is also worth minding that, should the post have published this in error - they will be sued to oblivion.
Biddens silence and the actions of his family lend credence to this story imo. You can be against trump and also call out scummy corruption.
The Twitter action was well reported.
That the NY post story wasn't disseminated was because the whole thing was based on such clearly unreliable sources. Part of responsible journalism is to interrogate your sources. Guiliani wasn't even providing access to the emails, only screenshots - totally unverifiable.
It was all nonsense.
That's not how it works.
Would twitter have acted the same way - if the story was about anyone else? I doubt it - I also cant fathom the cheerleading going on.
It may turn out to be false; but it hasn't been confirmed to be nonsense yet?
How do you know they did not interrogate the source? Given the risk - the evidence must have been compelling enough to run it imo.
Bidens actions in Ukraine have always seemed sus - there was also no good reason for hunter to be payed large sums by a Ukrainian energy company - other than for access/favours.
It will be interesting to see how the story turns out in the coming weeks.
There's no risk other than reputational. And the NYP had no reputation to speak of anyway.
Remember when Trump was impeached solely by the Democrats just for asking the Ukrainian president to look into corruption involving the Biden's? now we have evidence of it surface and it's immediately branded "Russian disinformation" and ignored by all of the corporate media, the very same media that ran with a Trump/Russia collusion narrative 24/7 for 3 years which directly undermined the US government. Where was their concern for "Russia disinformation" during all of that time? it's quite impressive how they know it to be Russian disinformation without even doing their job as investigative journalists and umm investigating it.
Real journalism is dead, most of them today are just too ideologically compromised that it prevents them from doing anything more than take the position of their own team, however irrational it might be.
Trump constantly gets called out for attacking the press but 4 years and one term later he hasn't done anything to stop them spreading their constant anti-Trump drivel, but one 200 year old newspaper posts an article the Biden supporters/corporate donors don't like and it gets censored into oblivion. Who are the dictators attacking the free press again?
Real journalism is dead, most of them today are just too ideologically compromised that it prevents them from doing anything more than take the position of their own team, however irrational it might be.
Trump constantly gets called out for attacking the press but 4 years and one term later he hasn't done anything to stop them spreading their constant anti-Trump drivel, but one 200 year old newspaper posts an article the Biden supporters/corporate donors don't like and it gets censored into oblivion. Who are the dictators attacking the free press again?
Last edited:
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,733
- Location
- Auckland
^ That's a LOL.
- Status