Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post Reply
User avatar
Gaybutton
Posts: 17628
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Thailand
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 899 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by Gaybutton »


bluemoon
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2020 7:07 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by bluemoon »

So ..the Donald (as in Duck ) is giving up daily briefings ..thank God we don't have to listen to any more of his crap .
Plus the fact his command of the English language is pathetic , a 12year old speaks better English , ( in the Northern States that is ) ,
same 12 year old in the South would have to put his rifle down first .

User avatar
windwalker
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:59 am
Has thanked: 226 times
Been thanked: 72 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by windwalker »

bluemoon wrote:
Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:26 pm
Plus the fact his command of the English language is pathetic , a 12year old speaks better English , ( in the Northern States that is ) ,
same 12 year old in the South would have to put his rifle down first .
Perhaps a badinage, but a false statement. 15 US Presidents alone came from Southern States, including Washington and Lincoln.
Although I do agree, 12 year olds speak better English, no matter what area of the country they originate from, than the current president.

User avatar
Jun
Posts: 2935
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:20 pm
Has thanked: 392 times
Been thanked: 190 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by Jun »

Here's a copy of Donald Trump's letter to the WHO.
In my view, that's proof that even he can get something right occasionally.

Admittedly, I've not checked every line of if for factual accuracy, but what it's saying is broadly correct. Particularly about flights in and out of China.
I also entirely agree with the sentiment about the poor management of the WHO, pandering to Xi Jingping, ahead of doing it's own job properly. For example, Taiwan is still excluded from membership.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 95393?s=20

Up2u
Posts: 1525
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:06 am
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 93 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by Up2u »

Jun wrote:
Tue May 19, 2020 2:54 pm
Here's a copy of Donald Trump's letter to the WHO.
In my view, that's proof that even he can get something right occasionally.

Admittedly, I've not checked every line of if for factual accuracy, but what it's saying is broadly correct. Particularly about flights in and out of China.
I also entirely agree with the sentiment about the poor management of the WHO, pandering to Xi Jingping, ahead of doing it's own job properly. For example, Taiwan is still excluded from membership.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 95393?s=20
I agree with your sentiment and undoubtedly WHO will challenge some of the details. But, this is also a typical Trump deflection, diversion tactic; it was he who praised Xi's handling and transparency of the crisis, it was he who pulled CDC observers out of China, it was he who did not act given warnings by Obama's playbook and within his own administration, it was he and the Republicans that did not restock the cupboards after SARS. The cat is out of the bag and there is no going back.

User avatar
Jun
Posts: 2935
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:20 pm
Has thanked: 392 times
Been thanked: 190 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by Jun »

Well, the WHO have been a disgrace & are IMHO largely responsible for the uncontrolled international spread of this disease.
They should have been much faster to react, with more fact based decision making and less kow towing to the man in Beijing.
Trump is right to call them out.

Of course, his own handling of the pandemic appears to have been very poor as well. However, it should not exclude the WHO from the criticism that they richly deserve.
Also, remember that the WHO are SUPPOSED to be experts. There has been very little evidence of the expertise in practice.

User avatar
Gaybutton
Posts: 17628
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Thailand
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 899 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by Gaybutton »


Up2u
Posts: 1525
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:06 am
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 93 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by Up2u »

Surprisingly, it was Lancet and not WHO was first to reply to Trump's deflection. Btw, they (Lancet) earlier officially did not endorse his reelection and ignored WHO and his own advisors.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-wh ... 9ae489512c

And,

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-ch ... 42ad3d8876

User avatar
Gaybutton
Posts: 17628
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Thailand
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 899 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by Gaybutton »

It's about time! I think by now most of you have seen the articles that Twitter is finally doing something about Trump and they're adding fact checks to his tweets.

The only problem is Twitter's weak language about it. "Potentially misleading" my ass! I wish they would call him the fucking liar that he is, but I don't think that will happen. I'd like it even better if they would block his account and delete every tweet he ever made, along with anything any of his cronies post.

I'm not going to paste in any of the complete articles. This, from CNN, should be enough for now. At least it's a start - one that should have happened long before now:
____________________________________________________________________________________

Washington (CNN Business) - For the first time, Twitter called tweets from Donald Trump "potentially misleading" — a decision that prompted the president to accuse the social media platform of election meddling.

On Tuesday, Twitter highlighted two of Trump's tweets that falsely claimed mail-in ballots would lead to widespread voter fraud, appending a message the company has introduced to combat misinformation and disputed or unverified claims.

"Get the facts about mail-in ballots," read the message beneath each tweet. It linked to a curated fact-check page the platform had created filled with further links and summaries of news articles debunking the assertion
.
Twitter said the move was aimed at providing "context" around Trump's remarks. But Twitter's unprecedented decision is likely to raise further questions about its willingness to consistently apply the label to other Trump tweets that have been deemed misleading by third parties, particularly as the president has lobbed baseless allegations against former Rep. Joe Scarborough regarding the death of a congressional staffer years ago.

Full article: https://us.cnn.com/2020/05/26/tech/twit ... index.html

User avatar
Gaybutton
Posts: 17628
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Thailand
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 899 times

Re: Consequences of Trump's Win - 5

Post by Gaybutton »

Why am I not surprised?

Why anyone, especially elected officials, would want to support Trump when he is such an obvious liar, ignorant, is presiding over an economic meltdown and pats himself on the back for it, refusing to set an example by simply wearing a mask and encouraging everyone to wear a mask, is greatly personally responsible for so many illnesses and deaths, and doesn't give a damn about anything other than trying to get reelected.

Do any of his supporters actually think Trump would hesitate for a second to throw them to the wolves if he thinks they crossed him in any way?

This whole bizarre episode is definitely on my "I Don't Get It" list - because I don't get it.

Maybe someone can explain it. I can't. It defies any semblance of logic and intelligence.

From where I sit, it's all unquestionably too similar to the same tactics used by Hitler and Goebbels. Trump cries violation of his free speech while at the same time threatening to try to close down Twitter and any other social media that criticizes him or wants people to know the facts instead of his flat out lies.

I just hope Twitter will stand up to it rather than giving in to it.
____________________________________________________________________________

Twitter Comes Under Attack From Trump’s Supporters

After the social media company labeled two of the president’s tweets as inaccurate on Tuesday, his adherents pounced.

By Kate Conger and Davey Alba

May 27, 2020

OAKLAND, Calif. — Not long after Twitter added a warning label to two of President Trump’s tweets on Tuesday, his supporters swung into action.

On Twitter, Mr. Trump’s adherents targeted one of the company’s executives for old tweets in which he had criticized the president and other Republicans. On Capitol Hill, lawmakers including Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, and Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, said they would move to regulate Twitter.

In right-wing media, pundits such as Trish Regan and websites like the Gateway Pundit decried the decision and accused Twitter of bias. The furor quickly spread through dozens of Facebook groups, Reddit forums and YouTube videos.

The activity was payback for Twitter, Mr. Trump’s favorite social media platform, after the company took action on the president’s tweets for the first time. While for years Twitter had been hands-off on Mr. Trump’s posts, which have often included falsehoods and threats, it added fact-checking labels to two of the president’s messages related to mail-in ballots on Tuesday to signal that they were inaccurate.

That sparked a vitriolic reaction from Mr. Trump, who said on Twitter that the company was interfering with the presidential election and stifling free speech. His supporters — a mixture of mainstream Republicans, far-right personalities and online acolytes — then quickly turned to a well-worn playbook of vilifying those whom they saw as slighting him.

In recent months, the targets of their ire have included Dr. Anthony Fauci, the infectious disease expert who has corrected overly rosy pronouncements about the coronavirus, and Bill Gates, the tech billionaire-turned-philanthropist who has indirectly criticized the Trump administration’s handling of the pandemic.

But this time, the right-wing machinery training its sights on a publicly traded company — Twitter — and its roughly 5,000 employees, took on an added menace, disinformation researchers said.

The tactics are something that Mr. Trump’s supporters “return to again and again,” said Melissa Ryan, chief executive of Card Strategies, a consulting firm that researches disinformation. “Where it gets worrisome for the tech companies is, of course, the Trump administration has the power to make their life very difficult.”

On Wednesday, Mr. Trump continued his tirade. In two tweets, he accused social media companies of working to “totally silence conservatives voices.” He added, “We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen.”

The right-wing backlash against Twitter built even as some researchers questioned how effective the labels on Mr. Trump’s tweets would be. Some said they were unlikely to sway public opinion about the reliability of Mr. Trump’s statements; others criticized the “get the facts” language that Twitter had added to the posts as vague. Several pointed out that Twitter had not gone as far as removing the posts.

Studies have found that fact-checking false claims on social media can help readers, but that specific labels like “disputed” or “rated false” were more effective in raising public understanding.

Even labeling a claim “false” on social media reduced its perceived accuracy by only about 13 percentage points, said Katie Clayton, a researcher who worked on a 2019 study at Dartmouth College that examined fact-check labels on news headlines on Facebook.

Still, she said, Twitter’s actions were “a step in the right direction.”

A Twitter spokesman said the online harassment that one of its executives was experiencing was “disappointing.” The San Francisco company, whose employees curated its fact-checks, added that it would continue labeling tweets that contained misinformation about elections or coronavirus. It said it might expand those policies to include labels for misinformation about additional topics.

In total, the backlash against Twitter has spread to more than 100 Facebook group and pages, thousands of tweets and several Reddit forums in which Mr. Trump’s followers have claimed that Twitter suppresses conservative speech, according to a New York Times analysis. In those online threads, Trump supporters said Twitter employees were biased liberals and urged Mr. Trump to fast-track regulations to limit the company.

“I wonder if Jack Dorsey grew up dreaming: ‘one day I will connect the world with an easy to use app, giving every individual a voice, then I will censor, throttle, and ban the people with whom I disagree,’” wrote one Twitter user, referring to the social network’s chief executive.

Fans of Mr. Trump also rapidly turned on Yoel Roth, a Twitter executive who combats bots, election interference and fake accounts. The campaign against Mr. Roth started late Tuesday when Liz Wheeler, a TV host on One America News Network, a cable network that has championed the Trump administration’s agenda, unearthed and reposted tweets in which Mr. Roth had referred to Mr. Trump as a “racist tangerine.” Others added a tweet from Mr. Roth that called Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, a “bag of farts.”

Far-right media outlets like Breitbart and The Gateway Pundit immediately seized on the messages as proof that Twitter was biased against conservatives. By Wednesday morning, Mr. Roth’s old tweets had reached the White House. On Fox News, Kellyanne Conway referenced him by name and called on supporters to “wake him up.”

“I think I want to raise the name of somebody at Twitter,” Ms. Conway said in the interview, spelling out Mr. Roth’s Twitter handle so that viewers could find his social media profile. “Somebody in San Francisco, go wake him up and tell him he’s about to get a lot more followers.”

Mentions of Mr. Roth on Twitter spiked to 180 mentions in a five-minute span on Tuesday evening, and to 478 mentions on Wednesday morning, according to The Times analysis. Mr. Roth declined to comment.

The decision to fact-check Mr. Trump was not Mr. Roth’s, a Twitter spokesman said. It was instead made by executives focused on legal and policy issues after Mr. Trump’s tweets were reported to the company through a portal used by election-related nonprofits and those who administer elections in states.

In Washington, the confrontation between Mr. Trump and Twitter reinvigorated calls among Republican lawmakers to change Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects technology companies from most liability for content posted by their users.

“The law still protects social media companies like Twitter because they are considered forums not publishers,” Mr. Rubio tweeted on Tuesday. “But if they have now decided to exercise an editorial role like a publisher then they should no longer be shielded from liability & treated as publishers under the law.”

In a letter on Wednesday to Mr. Dorsey, Mr. Hawley said Twitter enjoyed a “special immunity worth billions” and called on lawmakers to put an end to the “sweetheart deal.”

Ms. Ryan, the disinformation researcher, said Twitter is in “uncharted territory.”

“You can predict pretty easily how Trump is going to respond,” she said. But with Twitter, “once the company enforces a policy, is it going to succumb to the blowback? Or is it going to stay the course? I think that’s the important thing to watch moving forward.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/27/tech ... itter.html

Post Reply