The algorithms don't work and need serious improving mostly but picking up some of the more obvious stuff shouldn't be hard.Weren't you the one telling me that the algorithm doesn't work? What's the point of your suggestion? Making sure Qanon and similar conspiracies dominate everything? It would no longer be about news anymore
As far as I understand, Twitter made their initial assessment because they thought the emails themselves weren't verified. They could very well be wrong. But I seem to remember a lot of people here on this site saying that the news is false because it gets things wrong, a lot of the time because its too fast. But someone saying, "Hey, maybe we should check this out before we share it," is wrong? Why would we want the MSM to have no one looking at it critically before the wrong information comes out? I'm not asking Twitter to do this but I can understand what they were trying to achieve
While revenge porn is not ok, if the revenge porn in question is of Trump sucking off Putin and someone leaks that, I'm sure we'd wanna have it not get censored.There was an issue, however, they revised their policy for now to allow it. I have a feeling though it is just a matter of time before that decision is revered because it bit them in the arse.
1) When this becomes more widespread and everyone's private emails shared against their wishes, they will ban this garbage again.
2)When more nations pass laws restricting websites that violate their nations privacy on emails that these websites either have to comply or be blocked in most nations, likely including the US in the near future.
Just like revenge porn isn't okay, neither is taking private emails and publicizing them. Whistleblowers have a message of general importance to the public, this wasn't even that. I would feel the same if this were Ivanka's emails talking about someone meeting her Daddy as well. Both would be pointless and stupid and not to the benefit of the people at all here. It is like Okay we literally have Ivanka sitting in her Daddy's chair at G-20, and getting all her shit approved in China that they had previously declined, but we are supposed to care about Biden's son introducing some business partner/investor/ job or whatever to his dad? Like seriously? This is news how?
If this would have been something actually important, like what Snowden revealed, that would be covered under whistleblowers protections, but this is just.. garbage really. They looked, found nothing and grabbed this like "AHHA!" and everyone is looking at them going WTF is wrong with you?
While revenge porn is not ok, if the revenge porn in question is of Trump sucking off Putin and someone leaks that, I'm sure we'd wanna have it not get censored.
So yeah, if the rule is that if you're the corrupt son of a presidential candidate that your leaked emails are fair game if they are actually incriminating and relevant, I'm fine with that standard. It doesn't have to apply to people whose emails are not relevant to public interest.
Also I don't think they even revised their policy, they just interpreted it differently in this case.
Pretty sure both are news, the reason people didn't make as much of a fuss with Ivanka's deals story is that it wasn't censored before it could be even verified like this one was.
I for one, Don't want to watch either Trump or Putin sucking anyone. I am not seeing that Biden's son is corrupt here at all though. I am seeing this as a non issue even if it was Ivanka doing it. Hell, Ivanka used her Daddy's position to get all her previously declined trademarks approved in China and no one bats an eyelash, but THIS is supposed to be news here?
No, it's because Ivanka scoring deals in China is low level corruption of wangling benefit out of connections for her private gain. Biden (J.) was accused of corruption in public office, because Trump wanted a counter-accusation for those made against him. This story has therefore conveniently emerged in order to lend credence to that claim just before an election.Pretty sure both are news, the reason people didn't make as much of a fuss with Ivanka's deals story is that it wasn't censored before it could be even verified like this one was.
Both are non news. Ivanka's trademarks OTOH are not really the same because 1) did not involve private emails. 2) Were a direct result of Trump taking her to China on official business to meet XI. 3) Involve Trump's organization and businesses.Pretty sure both are news, the reason people didn't make as much of a fuss with Ivanka's deals story is that it wasn't censored before it could be even verified like this one was.