I second madjack, super quote. Now we only need an army of humanists who, like the old man at the end of the fight contemplating what beat him, can honestly say, "Nothing... I went out too far." Also, Mike Solana, great column. You have a new follower.
Understand that Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, and other social media are not about journalism, public enlightenment, speaking truth to power, fair play, enabling the next Arab Spring, or any other public good. Social media exist to make money for their founders and investors. Period.
The "censorship" they impose now protects those profits. How? Because for social media, self-censorship is better than the alternative. A truly free Twitter and FB would allow robust discussions to take place, absolutely. It would also allow the crazy left to launch jihads against MAGAs and the crazy right to publish every Democratic politician's home address and names of their children.
The first time people (i.e., voters) were murdered from that freedom--and murders would happen, there's no question--government would enact heavy regulations on content. Those regs would slow the data harvest, which would slow the profits, and social media cannot allow that. So, social media uses its current model--"censorship lite"--in order to stave off the "censorship heavy" regulations of government.
If Twitter and the rest were guaranteed zero regulations on who can post what, they'd eliminate their oversight tomorrow. Why? Because it's expensive: policing their platforms costs them hundreds of millions of dollars that could otherwise go into investors' pockets. They only spend that money now to avoid heavier sanctions by government.
So, our choice is not "no regulations and censorship," but how much and by whom. Be careful what you wish for, you may get it.
Me personally, I'm of the "let everybody post their shit, who cares?" school. But I don't have to face enraged voters every two years.
Good post and I get your point about "censorship lite" and how some control is necessary to prevent bad things from happening to innocent people. The problem I have is the censorship lite protocol is biased towards one political viewpoint. The resulting hypocrisy cannot be defended in my mind.
Yes. I recall a story, I can't remember where, about how jihadists were being allowed to make tweets accusing people of being blasphemers, which was essentially a way of sending out a kill order to their fellow jihadists. This is a type of Twitter content that can literally, directly lead to murder of individuals but Twitter did nothing at the time (maybe that's changed; who knows) because it wasn't on their radar, politically speaking. Either they genuinely didn't know how dangerous these posts were to those accused or they didn't care because "it's happening to those people over there" etc. Meanwhile they hem and haw about the "danger" of unwoke opinions and how said opinions are "creating violence".
Is this the "blockchain" technology I've been reading about? Or something else entirely? It would be fascinating to see an Internet with zero censorship--government or corporate--but the lack of moderating could lead to all kinds of Nasty. I tend toward less control over postings than more, but zero could be as dangerous as too much. What do you think?
Twitter has exposed the intolerance of the left. Prior to Twitter, the left claimed the moral high ground. They painted all conservatives as racists and against individual rights.
Now we see the TRUTH. Leftist are in favor of censorship and in racial discrimination - so long as the censorship is against anyone on the right AND the discrimination is against people who are white or asian.
Twitter is an echo chamber of the left. And as such, it has exposed an ugly side of the left and especially the more radical left.
Just to be clear - the right can be ugly too - but it's the hypocrisy of the left claiming moral superiority and yet doing immoral things that has come front and center on Twitter.
That kind of hypocrisy comes from every point on the political and cultural spectrum, not just "the left." Twitter is so vast and global that it's an echo chamber for anyone with a keyboard. For every left-winger whose views make my skin crawl, there's a right-winger hollering, "Hold my beer!"
Interesting take. Not how I see it. The handling of the Biden corruption and deplatforming a President are unforgivable sins. Twitter is and was and is a leftist cesspool.
They are unforgivable sins for sure. But my take is the article is focused on the supposition that Jack Dorsey is a moderate, and without him - Twitter will get much worse. I’m guessing that only time will tell.
"Jack Dorsey is a moderate." In the same way that the one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind. Dorsey is still a leftist. Just slightly less crazed than most.
"Deplatforming a president". He has the entirety of the US government at his disposal. Poor baby. If he only told the truth and acted like an adult (instead of a 12 year old), maybe he wouldn't be so dangerous.
Ah, you read one of those Washington Post articles that listed President Trump's "lies". Care to spell out a few of them for us here, so we can straighten you out? In the 4-5 years that I was watching Trump's speeches and interviews, I did not detect a single lie. He sometimes exaggerates; that's not quite the same thing. Now, comparatively speaking, hacks like Clinton, Obama, Nadler, Pelosi, and Biden lie through their teeth, reflexively and automatically and without the slightest guilt. They, like most politicians, are deceptive people who had to lie to build their fortunes and power base. And, of course, the left wing propaganda outfits like Twit and WaPo will never call them out.
1. Who cares. It doesn't affect the price of beans.
2. If that's the best example you can come up with, maybe this isn't the hill you want to die on.
Trump accomplished amazing things and had to fight every step of the way. Your guy, a senile puppet, is just a figurehead who avoids the press and public and disgraces our country, crapping his pants and surrendering to terrorists, while unelected crooks run the show.
You're moving the goalposts. You put Trump up on a pedestal of "never told a lie" a la Honest Abe Lincoln. I just picked the low-hanging fruit of a very transparent lie.
Also, I'm Canadian, so Biden isn't exactly "my guy". I've got Trudeau who is more or less a mirror image of Trump (i.e. dumb as shit but a savant when it comes to pandering to his base)
Trump and Trudeau are both highly intelligent, 8n my opinion. However, Trudeau unfortunately is only intelligent when it comes to holding onto power. Trump's more about getting great work done for his country.
Psaki saying that inflation and supply chain issues are because of people wanting treadmills for christmas is not materially different from Sean Spicer's prevarications about the inauguration. All bullshit is bullshit.
"Neither Biden nor anyone in his administration has ever told a lie, not even once"
OP said he "did not detect a single lie" from Trump over the course of 5 years. That kind of shit is why many on the left describe the MAGA crowd as a cult that straight up worships Donald Trump as some kind of demigod.
Oh come on, none of us patriots "worship" him. He's a flawed human being just like the rest of us. Democrats on the other hand worship Obiden like He's the 2nd coming of Christ. They steadfastly refuse to condemn him even despite his many disastrous decisions such as the clusterfk that was the Afghanistan pullout.
Charles…CARTER? Any relation? Well, let’s point out that the “12 year old,” managed the US oil reserve, the economy and the military, and Covid more deftly than current temporary management. Let me just finish by asking … were you aware of the recent indictments of HILLARY CLINTON’S LAWYER Sussman, and Demchenko for fabricating the RUSSIA HOAX. https://www.justice.gov/sco/pr/russian-national-indicted-making-false-statements-fbi
Ikr? But those topics are universes away from where Bari's ever gonna go.I guess you can take the girl out of the New York Times, but you can't take the New York Times out of the girl.
I have been on Twitter since 2007. By 2013, I saw the danger of it when I was among a few people caught up in the story about the Boston bomber that tagged the wrong person. I recognized then that information distorts and intensifies as it travels from person to person. The hysteria we're seeing now in our culture is because of Twitter. JK Rowling's dehumanization, the mass firings, the constant fear and paranoia is because of Twitter. I now have what can only be called children spies who watch my tweets, screen shot them, and are planning to try to destroy me with them. A while back I was swarmed by these folks, branded a "white supremacist" and viciously attacked. When I complained to Twitter they said "this does not meet our definition of abuse." Twitter is a terrible company because they changed their algorithm in 2017 to push outrage to the top. That was like pouring gasoline on a raging wildfire. It is bad for journalism, bad for news, bad for humanity. It is, however, very difficult to quit. I hope this movie empties the platform of all of its power to destroy every good thing.
When I complained to Twitter they said "this does not meet our definition of abuse."
——————————————
Yeah read my comment about the tweets that got me kicked off Twitter.
They do not have any standards. It is completely arbitrary because the people who work in their ‘safety’ group are 20-30ish hardcore left-wing activist scumbags.
And most of those who hunt me on a daily basis, it must be said, are men - or non-binary or trans. But rarely women. Although the women go along with it or stay silent out of fear.
My life experience also is being hunted/harassed by mostly males, and in the irony of life, it's almost always men who either stand with me or run interference on the misogynists.
We men are an interesting lot. Attackers, aggressors, defenders, protectors, sometimes all in the same day. World would be a little nicer if we learned to tone down the first two but kept up the others.
Solana writes: "Let’s be real: I am writing this piece for a newsletter founded by a former New York Times editor who, in a pre-Twitter universe, would have been shoved out of The Times and never heard from again."
If we're being real, the former New York Times editor never would have been "shoved out of The Time" in a pre-Twitter universe. It was Twitter, essentially, that forced her out in one of many examples of the users of a purportedly free-speech platform using the platform in derogation of free-speech principles.
1) AOC wrote an especially panicky demagogic tweet about something asinine like bottled water for voters or whatever and I responded
“They ocean is going to attack your house and the white supremacists are coming for you!!!”
Literally zero chance the Maoist safety officer at Twitter who read that joke didn’t know I was joking. The give away was probably the part about the ocean attacking her house. No?
2) After a particularly sanctimonious, self-aggrandizing, and preening tweet from Jim Acosta I replied
“I am personally going to be very sad when you eventually die for our sins.”
I mean does anyone not get this joke? I doubt there is anyone who doesn’t get the joke. The reason I say that, is because my reply had almost as many likes as Acosta’s ding dong tweet, which is probably why he reported me and had me removed permanently from my favorite website.
Somewhat annoying because the great Michael Malice was following me and now I don’t exist. Ben Shapiro retweeted me twice. Sad!
The new Twitter CEO sounds horrifying. I don’t know if this is true but I heard he proposed banning videos with people who haven’t given consent. Obviously this is so you can’t share videos of Democrat mobs setting restaurants and cars on fire next year when the Jim Crow Election doesn’t go their way.
Also, I should mention that I intentionally used wording where Jim Acosta was *eventually* going to die for our sins because I wanted to make clear that I wasn’t referring to an imminent demise in a way that could sound threatening but simply discussing the eventuality of Jim Acosta’s death which cannot be disputed unless Jim Acosta is immortal…..
Sorry deleted by mistake but the issue is one of content moderation- free speech doesn't include violence and hate speech - content moderation is one horrible job, best outsourced to AI but than that means many false positives.
Wrong. I was not removed for hate speech. I was removed for telling jokes by busybody Democrat Youth with an agenda.
(Jokes reveal the truth and that’s why Democrats are now terrible at jokes. Their movement revolves around hiding the truth.)
Content moderation certainly *can* be a horrible job, but that’s not what they are doing and you know it. They are censoring conservatives exclusively.
If they were actually in the depths of the internet removing child porn and Darrell Brooks-style tirades about evil whites and Jews, they wouldn’t be removing me for telling jokes that are clearly jokes.
If you spend your whole day monitoring beheading videos, you don’t look at my Jim Acosta joke and say
Mr. Solana is a Dorsey apologist. Perhaps he's correct that Dorsey kept the organization moderate, but nonetheless in the end, many conservative voices were silenced on the platform, in lockstep with Facebook and Google/Youtube. These companies rely on an army of leftist/liberal Millennials to edit and moderate content, and they have made their preferences clear: death threats, vicious jokes, slander, even calls for violence are all acceptable as long as they are directed at the Right, or at Jews and Christians, Israel supporters, advocates of democracy, even dissidents from fascistic regimes such as Communist China and North Korea.
Twitter went public in 2013, making its founders and investors very rich, but it only became profitable in 4Q 2017, 11 years after its founding. It is the ultimate social/blogging platform, with a slick user interface and highly sophisticated mathematical routines powering its famous "feed". Thousands of Famous and Important People possess the coveted "blue check" that confers a special gravitas on their august pronouncements.
Twitter's coveted status as the world's marketplace of ideas was won over many years of hard work, and was destroyed in a single day when they booted their most famous user, President Donald J. Trump, even before his term had ended. They have lost all legitimacy.
Sooner or later, a new paradigm will emerge, a network that does not discriminate against any particular ideas. Perhaps it will be a blockchain thing, immune from any particular government or private corporation's attempts to steer and control it. Or something altogether different, bold and innovative, unlike the crusty, stale crap that current social network platforms have become.
“When pressed, Jack explained exactly what “woke” meant to him, explicitly in terms of the institutional media, which he implied had been lying to us.”
——————————————————
I don’t think Jack was great but he wasn’t that bad. This may be what “woke” meant to him but that’s immaterial.
If you wore a “Serve the People” t-shirt during the Cultural Revolution, you were helping Mao. It doesn’t matter if you personally feel like “Serve the People” should be a tennis slogan. You’re helping Mao.
Twitter was an idealistic fantasy of democratizing speech and including everyone in on the conversation... but like every idea dreamed up in the cloistered world of the over educated it had unintended consequences... people are flawed and tribal... pour monetary incentive on top as an accelerant and you have a disaster... Dorsey was an idealistic fool and he is being replaced by an openly racist bigot... but it's ok because he is racist towards the "right" people... so kiss his ring and continue to worship at the alter of strife...
Gee..that's such a apropos, 'in a nutshell' elucidation of what's been happening everywhere over the last decade. Colleges, Corporate HR and PR departments, Social Media platforms, etc. All these Left leaning theoreticians who were gung ho to change the world by occupying these positions- being ambushed and over run by thier openly bigoted, openly racist, hard Left counterparts. And meekly stepping aside with nary a wimper to let them do it! The Left won't even fight for the best of what they are.
Frankly, I never understood why Americans would put up with a platform that even hinted at censorship, yet alone gave it the full Beria. But maybe America's just changed in ways I never thought possible.
As far as the 2020 "election" being an outright fraud, one doesn't have to rely on the exposure of vote changing schemes, exhuming dead voters or the usual Dem perfidy. The Hunter Biden censorship - including blocking the NY Post and the anguished screeches of the "50 former intel scribes" who swore the story reeked of a Putin plant - tell you all you need to know about the fix by the devious and malign elites and their ultimate installation in the Oval Office of a pliable human coprolite who rubber stamps their coup.
Twitter was one that I really never got involved with... the insanity of Twitter activists doesn't make any sense to me. I remember Mike Pence getting laughed at and mocked online about his "open door" policy with women in his office. I watched these miscreant little brats badmouth him online like they were equal to him... and I'm just reading about it in some clickbait news going, "He's still the VP of the United States, and you're not." You're a stupid little peon thinking he or she has the illusion of equality on a system that is raking in cash from your data.
I really wish people would pick up Cal Newport's books or maybe Bari could interview him. social media really isn't the great bastion of wonders people think it is. My wife and I have since deleted all social media... and it went out of our lives with a whimper, not a bang... because its a useless technology that lost any merit it had when governments realized what it could do during the Arab spring and put all their efforts in watching it.
"I watched these miscreant little brats badmouth him online like they were equal to him."
Hate to tell you, but American citizens ARE equal to him. Pence and other politicians are not royalty, and they in fact work for us. I don't enjoy people digitally pissing on each other for no reason, but they have every right to do so in a free society. Pence is fair game.
I find social media fun and useful, and a way to keep in touch with people I like but will never see in person. I just drink from the fresh water and stay away from the sewage.
Sir, I don't expect or want people to not feel they shouldn't criticize their statesmen in a Republic... but I'm also going to watch, roll my eyes, and identify the reality of the situation. Mr. Mike Pence, while part of a democracy, is of a political class. Won to him at some level by merit of his own works or boosted by those in his family before him, he still has to hold that job or role. He bears more responsibility, more weight, and in a world where gentlemen still existed, deserves a little more respect or benefit of the doubt. We may say that Mr. Mike Pence works for us... but until I can call him directly... and task him with work to do... the reality seems to mean it is the other way around and that "he works for us" is just a nice thing people like to say.
So again, to anyone criticizing his very wise precautions with women as an elected official or anything else regarding that matter, or anyone else that is pretty up there in clout... teenagers, man children, and banshees screaming into some electronic ether and high fiving their egos like they dunked a then sitting VP of a world superpower... before you "tweet" your "protest..." instead call up what line you can to reach the white house... heck go drive and visit... demand a hearing or visit with Mr. Mike Pence and let me know how it goes... then remind yourself that what you say doesn't matter in the grand scheme of his life.
That is where Twitter activism seems so absurd to me... how CEOs or companies are responding almost makes no sense to me... you really could just... ignore them. And that's the genius, people don't realize they're be deluded into thinking they have a say. The grand fortune 500 company isn't listening to you... it is taking notes on your interests to capitalize on you... you as a human... oh its just humoring you... you cute little thing.
Unsubscribe from the game is all I know of control right now I'm afraid.
I agree: "Twitter activism" makes people feel like they're "doing something" about [outrage of the hour] when the reality is that Power doesn't read their comments or respect their opinions. The only people who "win" in the social media wars are the CEOs raking in dough from data. I like to post on Facebook, but I never confuse that with genuine activism.
Right! Thanks I was worried I was coming off antagonistic. Even now me replying to this, I'm trying to ask myself if my opinion is needed (most likely not) and a part of this is just a mental exercise or some R&R with hints of valuable discourse... but in reality we're probably just two people really wanting to have a conversation, and if we had the time off and location right we could do it in person... so I try or we should try to balance it with the reality that we're not really hitting activism anymore than a strongly worded letter if even that.
Specifically, Does this mean that someone such as Andy Ngo and the Antifa pics and videos that he posts are no longer acceptable?
Or for that matter, all those Kyle Rittenhouse that were exculpatory and incriminating? How about all those pics and videos of Asian ladies being attacked? Or for that matter, the videos of the looting and smashing in San Francisco?
There is a ton of wiggle room in the new policy, like "unless it's a public figure or there's some public interest in leaving pics up".
The biggest issue is that because the policies are so vague, there's a very high risk the grey areas will be abused by all the wokescolds on Twitter's payroll, who are always looking to advance a partisan agenda.
To the left, these events never happened. The mainstream media ignores these topics because they fly on the face of their narrative. So as Twitter sheds Jack Dorsey, the author argues, this problem will get worse. I tend to agree. Dorsey, though responsible for all that happened as CEO, is walking away - just like Bari Weiss did.
I have progressive friends, as opposed to liberal, who had a fit when I told them some of the details that were known about Rittenhouse last year, like the fact that he had a job and family in Kenosha.
But I think the way I found out was from some of the twitter accounts I follow.
Frankly, I do wonder if much of the reason for the new policy aren't all the videos showing the identity of the people involved in crimes. If indeed, the new policy applies to those videos. And I think if you are in public it is an automatic legal consent to be filmed....but of course that standard does not apply to what a private company shows.
I think we need to keep in mind that their viewing is more akin to a religious experience than something empirical. People wanted Kenosha to burn as religious purification.
I'm not so sure about Dorsey's post election professions of support for free speech. It reminds me of dis-Hon. Sen. H Reid (D-NV) response when asked if he regretted blatantly lying about milquetoast Sen. M Romney (R-UT) from the well of the Senate (where you have complete immunity): "Obama got elected, didn't he?". It is easy to apologize after the damage is done when you know there will be zero accountability.
A good childhood friend of mine was poisoned by Twitter. Turned him into an angry, raging, lunatic - showing his envy towards people who have achieved more than him while on this planet. Because my friend punched down on me too, I ditched him. I’ll stay off Twitter and hope it’s ability to cancel people is eliminated. There is no good reason why idiots who have achieved nothing in the real world should be given the power by Twitter to dismantle successful, hard working citizens.
“How did you go bankrupt?” Bill asked.
“Two ways,” Mike said. “Gradually and then suddenly.”
Ernest Hemingway, 'The Sun Also Rises'
So it will go with Twitter. The echo chamber gradually collapsing in on itself, then suddenly disappearing.
God wiling.
I second madjack, super quote. Now we only need an army of humanists who, like the old man at the end of the fight contemplating what beat him, can honestly say, "Nothing... I went out too far." Also, Mike Solana, great column. You have a new follower.
Oh I love that book!!
Save a copy in your home library. Given its usage of the 'N' word, it won't be in general currency for long.
Great quote!!
One can only hope.
Understand that Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, and other social media are not about journalism, public enlightenment, speaking truth to power, fair play, enabling the next Arab Spring, or any other public good. Social media exist to make money for their founders and investors. Period.
The "censorship" they impose now protects those profits. How? Because for social media, self-censorship is better than the alternative. A truly free Twitter and FB would allow robust discussions to take place, absolutely. It would also allow the crazy left to launch jihads against MAGAs and the crazy right to publish every Democratic politician's home address and names of their children.
The first time people (i.e., voters) were murdered from that freedom--and murders would happen, there's no question--government would enact heavy regulations on content. Those regs would slow the data harvest, which would slow the profits, and social media cannot allow that. So, social media uses its current model--"censorship lite"--in order to stave off the "censorship heavy" regulations of government.
If Twitter and the rest were guaranteed zero regulations on who can post what, they'd eliminate their oversight tomorrow. Why? Because it's expensive: policing their platforms costs them hundreds of millions of dollars that could otherwise go into investors' pockets. They only spend that money now to avoid heavier sanctions by government.
So, our choice is not "no regulations and censorship," but how much and by whom. Be careful what you wish for, you may get it.
Me personally, I'm of the "let everybody post their shit, who cares?" school. But I don't have to face enraged voters every two years.
Good post and I get your point about "censorship lite" and how some control is necessary to prevent bad things from happening to innocent people. The problem I have is the censorship lite protocol is biased towards one political viewpoint. The resulting hypocrisy cannot be defended in my mind.
Thanks, RAH. I agree that any censorship should be even-handed, and aimed only at suppressing criminal behavior, not strong language.
Yes. I recall a story, I can't remember where, about how jihadists were being allowed to make tweets accusing people of being blasphemers, which was essentially a way of sending out a kill order to their fellow jihadists. This is a type of Twitter content that can literally, directly lead to murder of individuals but Twitter did nothing at the time (maybe that's changed; who knows) because it wasn't on their radar, politically speaking. Either they genuinely didn't know how dangerous these posts were to those accused or they didn't care because "it's happening to those people over there" etc. Meanwhile they hem and haw about the "danger" of unwoke opinions and how said opinions are "creating violence".
Very interesting observation. Thank you.
Thanks, Brian, much appreciated. As my late wife once noted about the industry in which she worked, "The answer to every question is, 'money.' "
Yes, money is what drives behavior. It always is.
Not always. Sometimes fanaticism, addiction, pride... https://youtu.be/4tAQM5uU8uk?t=470
You're right when speaking about individuals. I was only referring to corporate decisions, where everything boils down to $$$.
Is this the "blockchain" technology I've been reading about? Or something else entirely? It would be fascinating to see an Internet with zero censorship--government or corporate--but the lack of moderating could lead to all kinds of Nasty. I tend toward less control over postings than more, but zero could be as dangerous as too much. What do you think?
Thanks so much for this information. Much obliged!
Twitter has exposed the intolerance of the left. Prior to Twitter, the left claimed the moral high ground. They painted all conservatives as racists and against individual rights.
Now we see the TRUTH. Leftist are in favor of censorship and in racial discrimination - so long as the censorship is against anyone on the right AND the discrimination is against people who are white or asian.
Twitter is an echo chamber of the left. And as such, it has exposed an ugly side of the left and especially the more radical left.
Just to be clear - the right can be ugly too - but it's the hypocrisy of the left claiming moral superiority and yet doing immoral things that has come front and center on Twitter.
Yes, the left always claims the moral high ground and when absolved of their self guilt, engages in the same behavior.
That kind of hypocrisy comes from every point on the political and cultural spectrum, not just "the left." Twitter is so vast and global that it's an echo chamber for anyone with a keyboard. For every left-winger whose views make my skin crawl, there's a right-winger hollering, "Hold my beer!"
Good point. They have been exposed. Totalitarian bullies
Interesting take. Not how I see it. The handling of the Biden corruption and deplatforming a President are unforgivable sins. Twitter is and was and is a leftist cesspool.
They are unforgivable sins for sure. But my take is the article is focused on the supposition that Jack Dorsey is a moderate, and without him - Twitter will get much worse. I’m guessing that only time will tell.
"Jack Dorsey is a moderate." In the same way that the one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind. Dorsey is still a leftist. Just slightly less crazed than most.
"Deplatforming a president". He has the entirety of the US government at his disposal. Poor baby. If he only told the truth and acted like an adult (instead of a 12 year old), maybe he wouldn't be so dangerous.
Ah, you read one of those Washington Post articles that listed President Trump's "lies". Care to spell out a few of them for us here, so we can straighten you out? In the 4-5 years that I was watching Trump's speeches and interviews, I did not detect a single lie. He sometimes exaggerates; that's not quite the same thing. Now, comparatively speaking, hacks like Clinton, Obama, Nadler, Pelosi, and Biden lie through their teeth, reflexively and automatically and without the slightest guilt. They, like most politicians, are deceptive people who had to lie to build their fortunes and power base. And, of course, the left wing propaganda outfits like Twit and WaPo will never call them out.
The best ice cream sandwich I’ve ever had is not a lie. “I will get all Americans out of Afghanistan “ is
But all Americans *are* out of Afghanistan, and Trump signed the agreement that made it happen.
Even if he said it, it's not a "lie" to make a promise and not deliver. Every politician ever is guilty of that.
It's still a lie. Promising something you have no ability to accomplish is a LIE.
Largest crowd in the history of inaugurations. The fact he felt compelled to die on that hill speaks to his delusional narcissism.
1. Who cares. It doesn't affect the price of beans.
2. If that's the best example you can come up with, maybe this isn't the hill you want to die on.
Trump accomplished amazing things and had to fight every step of the way. Your guy, a senile puppet, is just a figurehead who avoids the press and public and disgraces our country, crapping his pants and surrendering to terrorists, while unelected crooks run the show.
You're moving the goalposts. You put Trump up on a pedestal of "never told a lie" a la Honest Abe Lincoln. I just picked the low-hanging fruit of a very transparent lie.
Also, I'm Canadian, so Biden isn't exactly "my guy". I've got Trudeau who is more or less a mirror image of Trump (i.e. dumb as shit but a savant when it comes to pandering to his base)
Trump and Trudeau are both highly intelligent, 8n my opinion. However, Trudeau unfortunately is only intelligent when it comes to holding onto power. Trump's more about getting great work done for his country.
Good ol' Jolson Trudeau. A role model if there ever was one.
Psaki saying that inflation and supply chain issues are because of people wanting treadmills for christmas is not materially different from Sean Spicer's prevarications about the inauguration. All bullshit is bullshit.
Sure, but then I would never say something like:
"Neither Biden nor anyone in his administration has ever told a lie, not even once"
OP said he "did not detect a single lie" from Trump over the course of 5 years. That kind of shit is why many on the left describe the MAGA crowd as a cult that straight up worships Donald Trump as some kind of demigod.
Oh come on, none of us patriots "worship" him. He's a flawed human being just like the rest of us. Democrats on the other hand worship Obiden like He's the 2nd coming of Christ. They steadfastly refuse to condemn him even despite his many disastrous decisions such as the clusterfk that was the Afghanistan pullout.
True & accurate account of what happened.
The great majority of the “US Government “ stool solidly against him and hindered everything he tried to accomplish. You are a disgusting fool.
Charles…CARTER? Any relation? Well, let’s point out that the “12 year old,” managed the US oil reserve, the economy and the military, and Covid more deftly than current temporary management. Let me just finish by asking … were you aware of the recent indictments of HILLARY CLINTON’S LAWYER Sussman, and Demchenko for fabricating the RUSSIA HOAX. https://www.justice.gov/sco/pr/russian-national-indicted-making-false-statements-fbi
Ikr? But those topics are universes away from where Bari's ever gonna go.I guess you can take the girl out of the New York Times, but you can't take the New York Times out of the girl.
Funny but true.
I have been on Twitter since 2007. By 2013, I saw the danger of it when I was among a few people caught up in the story about the Boston bomber that tagged the wrong person. I recognized then that information distorts and intensifies as it travels from person to person. The hysteria we're seeing now in our culture is because of Twitter. JK Rowling's dehumanization, the mass firings, the constant fear and paranoia is because of Twitter. I now have what can only be called children spies who watch my tweets, screen shot them, and are planning to try to destroy me with them. A while back I was swarmed by these folks, branded a "white supremacist" and viciously attacked. When I complained to Twitter they said "this does not meet our definition of abuse." Twitter is a terrible company because they changed their algorithm in 2017 to push outrage to the top. That was like pouring gasoline on a raging wildfire. It is bad for journalism, bad for news, bad for humanity. It is, however, very difficult to quit. I hope this movie empties the platform of all of its power to destroy every good thing.
When I complained to Twitter they said "this does not meet our definition of abuse."
——————————————
Yeah read my comment about the tweets that got me kicked off Twitter.
They do not have any standards. It is completely arbitrary because the people who work in their ‘safety’ group are 20-30ish hardcore left-wing activist scumbags.
And most of those who hunt me on a daily basis, it must be said, are men - or non-binary or trans. But rarely women. Although the women go along with it or stay silent out of fear.
My life experience also is being hunted/harassed by mostly males, and in the irony of life, it's almost always men who either stand with me or run interference on the misogynists.
YES so true. Very few women stand in the line of fire. Some do. It's always men who offer up a public hand of support.
JK Rowling one of the few exceptions.
We men are an interesting lot. Attackers, aggressors, defenders, protectors, sometimes all in the same day. World would be a little nicer if we learned to tone down the first two but kept up the others.
🙁 sad face!
Solana writes: "Let’s be real: I am writing this piece for a newsletter founded by a former New York Times editor who, in a pre-Twitter universe, would have been shoved out of The Times and never heard from again."
If we're being real, the former New York Times editor never would have been "shoved out of The Time" in a pre-Twitter universe. It was Twitter, essentially, that forced her out in one of many examples of the users of a purportedly free-speech platform using the platform in derogation of free-speech principles.
I was kicked off of Twitter for two jokes:
1) AOC wrote an especially panicky demagogic tweet about something asinine like bottled water for voters or whatever and I responded
“They ocean is going to attack your house and the white supremacists are coming for you!!!”
Literally zero chance the Maoist safety officer at Twitter who read that joke didn’t know I was joking. The give away was probably the part about the ocean attacking her house. No?
2) After a particularly sanctimonious, self-aggrandizing, and preening tweet from Jim Acosta I replied
“I am personally going to be very sad when you eventually die for our sins.”
I mean does anyone not get this joke? I doubt there is anyone who doesn’t get the joke. The reason I say that, is because my reply had almost as many likes as Acosta’s ding dong tweet, which is probably why he reported me and had me removed permanently from my favorite website.
Somewhat annoying because the great Michael Malice was following me and now I don’t exist. Ben Shapiro retweeted me twice. Sad!
The new Twitter CEO sounds horrifying. I don’t know if this is true but I heard he proposed banning videos with people who haven’t given consent. Obviously this is so you can’t share videos of Democrat mobs setting restaurants and cars on fire next year when the Jim Crow Election doesn’t go their way.
*the ocean (edit button 😢😢)
Also, I should mention that I intentionally used wording where Jim Acosta was *eventually* going to die for our sins because I wanted to make clear that I wasn’t referring to an imminent demise in a way that could sound threatening but simply discussing the eventuality of Jim Acosta’s death which cannot be disputed unless Jim Acosta is immortal…..
Sorry deleted by mistake but the issue is one of content moderation- free speech doesn't include violence and hate speech - content moderation is one horrible job, best outsourced to AI but than that means many false positives.
Wrong. I was not removed for hate speech. I was removed for telling jokes by busybody Democrat Youth with an agenda.
(Jokes reveal the truth and that’s why Democrats are now terrible at jokes. Their movement revolves around hiding the truth.)
Content moderation certainly *can* be a horrible job, but that’s not what they are doing and you know it. They are censoring conservatives exclusively.
If they were actually in the depths of the internet removing child porn and Darrell Brooks-style tirades about evil whites and Jews, they wouldn’t be removing me for telling jokes that are clearly jokes.
If you spend your whole day monitoring beheading videos, you don’t look at my Jim Acosta joke and say
“OMG he must be stopped!!”
Wow, great jokes - no surprise on how the Twitter verse responded.
Mr. Solana is a Dorsey apologist. Perhaps he's correct that Dorsey kept the organization moderate, but nonetheless in the end, many conservative voices were silenced on the platform, in lockstep with Facebook and Google/Youtube. These companies rely on an army of leftist/liberal Millennials to edit and moderate content, and they have made their preferences clear: death threats, vicious jokes, slander, even calls for violence are all acceptable as long as they are directed at the Right, or at Jews and Christians, Israel supporters, advocates of democracy, even dissidents from fascistic regimes such as Communist China and North Korea.
Twitter went public in 2013, making its founders and investors very rich, but it only became profitable in 4Q 2017, 11 years after its founding. It is the ultimate social/blogging platform, with a slick user interface and highly sophisticated mathematical routines powering its famous "feed". Thousands of Famous and Important People possess the coveted "blue check" that confers a special gravitas on their august pronouncements.
Twitter's coveted status as the world's marketplace of ideas was won over many years of hard work, and was destroyed in a single day when they booted their most famous user, President Donald J. Trump, even before his term had ended. They have lost all legitimacy.
Sooner or later, a new paradigm will emerge, a network that does not discriminate against any particular ideas. Perhaps it will be a blockchain thing, immune from any particular government or private corporation's attempts to steer and control it. Or something altogether different, bold and innovative, unlike the crusty, stale crap that current social network platforms have become.
“When pressed, Jack explained exactly what “woke” meant to him, explicitly in terms of the institutional media, which he implied had been lying to us.”
——————————————————
I don’t think Jack was great but he wasn’t that bad. This may be what “woke” meant to him but that’s immaterial.
If you wore a “Serve the People” t-shirt during the Cultural Revolution, you were helping Mao. It doesn’t matter if you personally feel like “Serve the People” should be a tennis slogan. You’re helping Mao.
I wish everyone would stop helping Mao.
Twitter was an idealistic fantasy of democratizing speech and including everyone in on the conversation... but like every idea dreamed up in the cloistered world of the over educated it had unintended consequences... people are flawed and tribal... pour monetary incentive on top as an accelerant and you have a disaster... Dorsey was an idealistic fool and he is being replaced by an openly racist bigot... but it's ok because he is racist towards the "right" people... so kiss his ring and continue to worship at the alter of strife...
Gee..that's such a apropos, 'in a nutshell' elucidation of what's been happening everywhere over the last decade. Colleges, Corporate HR and PR departments, Social Media platforms, etc. All these Left leaning theoreticians who were gung ho to change the world by occupying these positions- being ambushed and over run by thier openly bigoted, openly racist, hard Left counterparts. And meekly stepping aside with nary a wimper to let them do it! The Left won't even fight for the best of what they are.
Frankly, I never understood why Americans would put up with a platform that even hinted at censorship, yet alone gave it the full Beria. But maybe America's just changed in ways I never thought possible.
As far as the 2020 "election" being an outright fraud, one doesn't have to rely on the exposure of vote changing schemes, exhuming dead voters or the usual Dem perfidy. The Hunter Biden censorship - including blocking the NY Post and the anguished screeches of the "50 former intel scribes" who swore the story reeked of a Putin plant - tell you all you need to know about the fix by the devious and malign elites and their ultimate installation in the Oval Office of a pliable human coprolite who rubber stamps their coup.
Thank you for "coprolite"!
Where Jack could make a huge difference is taking on or setting up a new ACLU.
I think I saw him on Wall Street the other day, sitting on a blanket holding up a cardboard sign. Think he's up to it?
Twitter was one that I really never got involved with... the insanity of Twitter activists doesn't make any sense to me. I remember Mike Pence getting laughed at and mocked online about his "open door" policy with women in his office. I watched these miscreant little brats badmouth him online like they were equal to him... and I'm just reading about it in some clickbait news going, "He's still the VP of the United States, and you're not." You're a stupid little peon thinking he or she has the illusion of equality on a system that is raking in cash from your data.
I really wish people would pick up Cal Newport's books or maybe Bari could interview him. social media really isn't the great bastion of wonders people think it is. My wife and I have since deleted all social media... and it went out of our lives with a whimper, not a bang... because its a useless technology that lost any merit it had when governments realized what it could do during the Arab spring and put all their efforts in watching it.
"I watched these miscreant little brats badmouth him online like they were equal to him."
Hate to tell you, but American citizens ARE equal to him. Pence and other politicians are not royalty, and they in fact work for us. I don't enjoy people digitally pissing on each other for no reason, but they have every right to do so in a free society. Pence is fair game.
I find social media fun and useful, and a way to keep in touch with people I like but will never see in person. I just drink from the fresh water and stay away from the sewage.
Sir, I don't expect or want people to not feel they shouldn't criticize their statesmen in a Republic... but I'm also going to watch, roll my eyes, and identify the reality of the situation. Mr. Mike Pence, while part of a democracy, is of a political class. Won to him at some level by merit of his own works or boosted by those in his family before him, he still has to hold that job or role. He bears more responsibility, more weight, and in a world where gentlemen still existed, deserves a little more respect or benefit of the doubt. We may say that Mr. Mike Pence works for us... but until I can call him directly... and task him with work to do... the reality seems to mean it is the other way around and that "he works for us" is just a nice thing people like to say.
So again, to anyone criticizing his very wise precautions with women as an elected official or anything else regarding that matter, or anyone else that is pretty up there in clout... teenagers, man children, and banshees screaming into some electronic ether and high fiving their egos like they dunked a then sitting VP of a world superpower... before you "tweet" your "protest..." instead call up what line you can to reach the white house... heck go drive and visit... demand a hearing or visit with Mr. Mike Pence and let me know how it goes... then remind yourself that what you say doesn't matter in the grand scheme of his life.
That is where Twitter activism seems so absurd to me... how CEOs or companies are responding almost makes no sense to me... you really could just... ignore them. And that's the genius, people don't realize they're be deluded into thinking they have a say. The grand fortune 500 company isn't listening to you... it is taking notes on your interests to capitalize on you... you as a human... oh its just humoring you... you cute little thing.
Unsubscribe from the game is all I know of control right now I'm afraid.
I agree: "Twitter activism" makes people feel like they're "doing something" about [outrage of the hour] when the reality is that Power doesn't read their comments or respect their opinions. The only people who "win" in the social media wars are the CEOs raking in dough from data. I like to post on Facebook, but I never confuse that with genuine activism.
Right! Thanks I was worried I was coming off antagonistic. Even now me replying to this, I'm trying to ask myself if my opinion is needed (most likely not) and a part of this is just a mental exercise or some R&R with hints of valuable discourse... but in reality we're probably just two people really wanting to have a conversation, and if we had the time off and location right we could do it in person... so I try or we should try to balance it with the reality that we're not really hitting activism anymore than a strongly worded letter if even that.
Yes, pions talking down on a sitting VP, hilarious for sure.
Your typo is unintentionally hilarious. A pion is a particle slightly larger than an electron.
Peon 🤣🤣.
This article is the worst writing I have ever encountered north of the comment section.
Specifically, Does this mean that someone such as Andy Ngo and the Antifa pics and videos that he posts are no longer acceptable?
Or for that matter, all those Kyle Rittenhouse that were exculpatory and incriminating? How about all those pics and videos of Asian ladies being attacked? Or for that matter, the videos of the looting and smashing in San Francisco?
Any thoughts?
There is a ton of wiggle room in the new policy, like "unless it's a public figure or there's some public interest in leaving pics up".
The biggest issue is that because the policies are so vague, there's a very high risk the grey areas will be abused by all the wokescolds on Twitter's payroll, who are always looking to advance a partisan agenda.
To the left, these events never happened. The mainstream media ignores these topics because they fly on the face of their narrative. So as Twitter sheds Jack Dorsey, the author argues, this problem will get worse. I tend to agree. Dorsey, though responsible for all that happened as CEO, is walking away - just like Bari Weiss did.
I have progressive friends, as opposed to liberal, who had a fit when I told them some of the details that were known about Rittenhouse last year, like the fact that he had a job and family in Kenosha.
But I think the way I found out was from some of the twitter accounts I follow.
Frankly, I do wonder if much of the reason for the new policy aren't all the videos showing the identity of the people involved in crimes. If indeed, the new policy applies to those videos. And I think if you are in public it is an automatic legal consent to be filmed....but of course that standard does not apply to what a private company shows.
I hope your progressive friends begin to see that the news media they follow is distorting their reality.
I think we need to keep in mind that their viewing is more akin to a religious experience than something empirical. People wanted Kenosha to burn as religious purification.
Yes, their obsession with their political point of view can be equated to a religious pursuit.
I'm not so sure about Dorsey's post election professions of support for free speech. It reminds me of dis-Hon. Sen. H Reid (D-NV) response when asked if he regretted blatantly lying about milquetoast Sen. M Romney (R-UT) from the well of the Senate (where you have complete immunity): "Obama got elected, didn't he?". It is easy to apologize after the damage is done when you know there will be zero accountability.
If he supported free speech, he would have reinstated Trump on Twitter. Actions speak louder than words.
A good childhood friend of mine was poisoned by Twitter. Turned him into an angry, raging, lunatic - showing his envy towards people who have achieved more than him while on this planet. Because my friend punched down on me too, I ditched him. I’ll stay off Twitter and hope it’s ability to cancel people is eliminated. There is no good reason why idiots who have achieved nothing in the real world should be given the power by Twitter to dismantle successful, hard working citizens.
I lost an old friend over politics. I'm still willing to be friends, but they aren't. This is what sets conservatives apart from liberals.