undefined | Better HN

0 pointshenriquez5y ago0 comments

I think it’s more fair to characterize them as corporatist and neoconservative/neoliberal. If the mainstream media were actually left-wing they would be propagandizing for Bernie Sanders. Instead they’re propagandizing in favor of old-guard politicians like Mitt Romney and Nancy Pelosi. But no matter how you slice it, it’s still propaganda.

I agree with the parent commenter that this will only backfire, likely causing the opposite of intended effect on undecided voters. Tech companies like Twitter are not in a position to play arbiters on what is factual and what isn’t. And I think it’s really dangerous both for people to expect tech companies to assume this mantle and also to expect them to do a good (or honest) job of it.

0 comments

jolux5y ago

I'm not sure why you think there's an intended effect here other than "maybe get a few people who are more on the fence to read something real and make it look like Twitter is Doing Something TM." I would hardly be surprised if it succeeded at those things.

henriquezOP5y ago

“The facts” on mail-in ballots are mostly opinions though. It’s presumptuous of a tech company to insert themselves into public discourse to correct what they perceive as wrongthink, and it invites a dangerous situation where a few tech companies can enforce discourse that suits their political biases. Just because people may agree with them in this case doesn’t make it a good idea long term. To me this looks like a slippery slope into fascism.

jolux5y ago

The facts about voter fraud aren’t opinions, though, and the fact is that it’s extremely rare. What reason do we have to expect that mail-in ballots will make it common to the extent it influences an election?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointshenriquez5y ago0 comments

0 comments

jolux5y ago

henriquezOP5y ago

jolux5y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse