Quote:
Originally Posted by Traum
WTF dude? Did you even actually read what was written in the Meta letter?
While the 3 points that this House Judiciary GOP account mentioned were all factually true, the way they are presented together is clearly meant to mislead.
I don't have much to say about #1 since the remark is simply far too general to make any reasonable comment on. Depending on a lot of other contextual and background information, #1 could be spun into a good, bad, neutral thing, or anything in between.
#2 is kind of similar, although I would also say that FB pretty much did this since their early days, and if any FB user were to claim that they didn't know that's what FB did, they'd be idiots.
#3 is particularly meaningless. It happened because on FB's own accord, they were trying to fact check the news. IMO for a credible news / social media platform, presenting credible information is more important than delivering that new information at breakneck speed. And because of that, it isn't even about free speech.
Assuming that Twitter account is managed by official GOP staff, it's a shame that the GOP is intentionally trying to mislead people.  |
Enlight me on what part was misleading?
Zuckerberg himself admitted that members of the administration "including the White House" pressured them into censoring content.
Now, regardless of what constitutes as disinformation or whatever... such suppression of voices, when you read this admission and watch this video
Where Kamala Harris focuses her campaign message on "freedom"... if that's not hypocrisy, I don't know what hypocrisy actually means. They are basically saying "you are free to say whatever as long as it fits our narrative." What kind of freedom is that? It's like what the Chinese official said during the British interview recently: "you can have an opinion on Chinese leader as long as it's positive."
