TwitterGate Hoax ?

[Aianawa]

Hopefullll this thread does not add to the hoaxy bin.

Up to twittergate 9 atm, searched our site and only one hit on a hoaxed thread.

Appears from what i have gathered myself so far and differing good journalists articles, that this is real, happened, data be true.

Question is why no Mainstream media articles, vid clips, interviews etc ?.

[Aianawa]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibP2DNhaP9k

[Diabolical Boids]

I've been casually watching the information unfold and trying to avoid the commentary. Dropping the files, documents, emails, the meeting schedules with alphabet agencies, suggestions from alpha agencies, secret sensitive servers and their purpose, the directives from alphabet agencies, the brainstorming sessions about how to keep things like Russian Infiltration narratives alive, how to find more people a public official may have peed on, how to monitor potentially risky people who don't have a reach or have a low follow rate who may say something or bring up awkward questions.

I skimmed through all of it and only closely scrutinized a few items.

Nothing really that has not already been speculated on it before. Just details and what could be considered material evidence.

The flow charts are amusing. Flow charts used to ban people when they were not saying anything or doing anything that would usually promote a ban at Twitter or even elsewhere. They showed the steps used to prove the target said or meant something that they didn't either say or mean.

Twitter was beginning to have some real problems on their hands, pre Musk. Individuals and groups that were previously counted on not to oppose or rebel against the narrative began to make unflattering statements and even politicize themselves. Like the Walk Away Movement (fore ever banned), Bill Maher, and Gays Against Groomers.

Hoax or not it's doubtful anything will come of it in terms of alpha involvement, and censor ship.

Merry Christmas.

[Fred Steeves]

[Aragorn]

Hopefullll this thread does not add to the hoaxy bin.

I'm afraid so, Vern. But to be honest, considering that this applies to pretty much every thread you've been starting in the last couple of years, I'm not surprised.

Question is why no Mainstream media articles, vid clips, interviews etc ?.

Really, you have to ask? Isn't it abundantly clear, then?

---

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibP2DNhaP9k

Ahhh, Faux News, now there's a credible and unbiased news outlet. And again, I'm not surprised, because it is once again a right-wing information source — your favorite kind, isn't it?

Read and weep, my Hobbit friend... ↓

---

Source: NPR

Elon Musk is using the Twitter Files to discredit foes and push conspiracy theories

Elon Musk while attending a conference in Norway earlier this year. The billionaire new owner of Twitter is releasing information about the company's high-profile moderation decisions.

Twitter owner Elon Musk says he's pulling back the curtain on how the social network has handled high-profile content moderation decisions, including banning then-President Donald Trump after his supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Over the past two weeks, Musk has been releasing internal documents to a handpicked group of journalists who are digging through them and posting excerpts on Twitter.

Musk and his allies promote these tweet threads — dubbed the "Twitter Files" — as bombshell revelations proving that Twitter intentionally muzzled conservatives because of their political views. That's a long-running claim by Republicans who are convinced social media companies censor them, despite ample evidence to the contrary. Twitter's internal researchers, for example, have found its algorithms favor right-leaning political content.

But many tech journalists, social media experts and former Twitter employees say Musk's claims are over-hyped, given that the documents shared so far largely corroborate what is already known about the messy business of policing a large social network.

"What is really coming through in the Twitter Files for me is: people who are confronting high-stakes, unanticipated events and trying to figure out what policies apply and how," said Renée DiResta, research manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory, who studies how narratives spread on social networks.



What are the Twitter Files?

They're a collection of internal emails and Slack chats capturing Twitter employees discussing company policies and fraught moderation calls. So far they've covered the decision to ban Trump, Twitter's short-lived decision to block a news story in October 2020 drawn from material on Hunter Biden's laptop, and how the company limits the reach of accounts that break its rules, including some well-known right-wing users.

Musk has given exclusive access to a small group of independent journalists including Matt Taibbi, formerly of Rolling Stone, and Bari Weiss, a former New York Times opinion columnist, under the condition they first post about the documents on Twitter.

The selection of Taibbi and Weiss, who both share Musk's criticisms of the mainstream media and what they see as progressive censoriousness, has itself caused controversy. Other news outlets have not been given access to the original documents, which have been presented only in screenshots and excerpts in lengthy tweet threads, often without context.

Twitter's headquarters in San Francisco, Calif. The company's biggest moderation decisions in 2020 and 2021 are under renewed scrutiny as Musk reveals internal company discussions.

What do the documents show?

The Twitter Files might not be the bombshell Musk teased in popcorn emoji-laden tweets — but they offer an illuminating glimpse into the sausage-making of content moderation.

They show Twitter executives and rank and file employees grappling with difficult tradeoffs, questioning the company's rules and how they should be applied — and in some cases, getting things wrong.

Take Twitter's decision right before the 2020 presidential election to briefly block users from sharing a New York Post story alleging shady business dealings by then-candidate Joe Biden's son, Hunter, in Ukraine.

The article was based on files from Hunter Biden's laptop, which the Post said it got from Trump's private attorney, Rudy Giuliani, and former Trump adviser Steve Bannon. At the time, it was unclear whether that material was authentic. After being burned by the Russian hack and leak of Democratic National Committee emails in 2016, tech companies were on edge over the possibility of a repeat — and so Twitter decided to restrict the Post story.

Citing its rules against sharing hacked material containing private information, the company showed a warning to anyone who tried to post a link to the article saying it was "potentially harmful." It also suspended the New York Post's own Twitter account until it deleted its tweets about the story. (Facebook was alarmed by the article, too, but didn't go as far as Twitter. It allowed the link to be posted, but limited distribution of those posts while its outside fact-checkers reviewed the claims.)

Twitter's aggressive stance immediately created a huge backlash across the political spectrum. The company was slammed for taking a heavy-handed approach to a story that, while controversial, was being reported by a major news outlet, and for offering little justification for its decision. Within days Twitter reversed the block and changed its policies on hacked materials. Soon after, then-CEO Jack Dorsey said the company had made a mistake.

That's all been publicly known and widely reported on over the past two years. The material shared by Musk paints a more vivid picture of the scramble inside Twitter to figure out what to do — but does not fundamentally alter that picture.

And it does not show any evidence that there was government involvement in the move to block the New York Post story, despite assertions by Musk and others.

On Tuesday, Dorsey weighed in on the Twitter Files, saying the company had made errors in how it approached content moderation.

"I continue to believe there was no ill intent or hidden agendas, and everyone acted according to the best information we had at the time," he wrote. "Of course mistakes were made."

He said he wished the internal files had been "released Wikileaks-style, with many more eyes and interpretations to consider." He added: "There's nothing to hide ... only a lot to learn from."



What's missing from the Twitter Files?

DiResta said there's good reason to demand more insight into how social media companies operate. "Often these decisions are quite inscrutable," she said. "These are platforms that shape public opinion, and so the question of how they're moderated and how they're designed is impactful."

But she said to get the full picture, outsiders need more than the "anecdotes" Musk's selected journalists are sharing — which, so far, focus exclusively on charged, highly partisan American political dramas.

"Twitter is a global platform. Twitter's moderation policies have to apply at a global level," she said.

To better understand the decision to ban Trump, for example, it would help to see discussions around the accounts of other world leaders who have not been kicked off the platform, she said.

"There's value in what's been revealed to the public, but at the same time, it is primarily reinforcing a perception in large part based on your pre-existing opinions as partisan individuals within the United States," DiResta said.



How are the claims being received by Musk's target audience?

For many conservatives and Musk fans, the existence of these internal discussions is itself a smoking gun. The fact that many mainstream outlets are steering clear of covering the Twitter Files without a large degree of skepticism is only fueling righteous indignation.

Framing the disclosures as secret knowledge plays particularly well on Twitter, said Mike Caulfield, a research scientist at the University of Washington's Center for an Informed Public.

"This very cinematic world-building activity has become part of everyday culture on Twitter for certain groups of people," he said.

Musk's conspiracy-baiting has quickly turned ugly, as he uses a project that purports to be about transparency to discredit Twitter's former leadership and harass people he disagrees with. That's giving his 120 million Twitter followers easy targets.

Over the weekend, Musk smeared Twitter's former head of safety, Yoel Roth, who features prominently in the documents, with homophobic tropes common in anti-LGBTQ conspiracy theories. He also attacked Dr. Anthony Fauci, who Musk says will feature in future installments of the Twitter files, with a tweet amplifying a conspiracy theory about the COVID-19 pandemic.

His tweets triggered violent threats against both men. Roth and his family have been forced to flee their home, according to a person familiar with the matter.

"The current attacks on my former colleagues could be dangerous and doesn't solve anything," Dorsey wrote on Tuesday. "If you want to blame, direct it at me and my actions, or lack thereof."



What is Musk doing differently when it comes to content moderation?

Musk's ongoing embrace of conspiracies and far-right ideological grievances is adding to worries about his stewardship of Twitter.

He has made deep cuts to the company's trust and safety workforce, including teams focused on non-English languages and state-backed propaganda operations. This week, Twitter disbanded its external Trust and Safety Council, some of whose members had come under online attack after Musk criticized them.

The CEO's willingness to target people working to keep the platform's users safe, including through the Twitter Files releases, is creating a "chilling effect," according to one Trust and Safety Council member, who requested anonymity due to concerns of retaliation.

Musk has endorsed some existing moderation tools that the Twitter Files cast as censorship, like its longtime, publicly stated policy of limiting the visibility of some tweets and accounts that break its rules. "New Twitter policy is freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach," he tweeted last month.

At the same time, he's reinstated thousands of accounts that had been banned for breaking the rules, including Trump, neo-Nazis, white nationalists and QAnon promoters — but won't allow conspiracy theorist Alex Jones or Kanye West, who's been vocally antisemitic, to tweet. How that squares with Musk's purported embrace of free speech principles is unclear.

But with his drumbeat of Twitter Files releases and gleeful tweets dunking on the company's former employees, Musk has successfully hijacked the conversation.

"It is being processed as punitive and sort of owning the last regime, as opposed to saying, 'Here are things that we can see in these files and here is how it's going to be done differently under our watch,'" DiResta said.

"Ultimately, transparency is key," she added. "And it can't be transparency as a cudgel."

Source: NPR

[Aianawa]

Thank goodness Aragorn but i was hoping my clock rite once a day % was improving.

Fred that ice cube must be from the fridge and yes this n that may shine lots of lite , or not, you know it will too , yes lol which is next do you feel ?.

I've been casually watching the information unfold and trying to avoid the commentary. Dropping the files, documents, emails, the meeting schedules with alphabet agencies, suggestions from alpha agencies, secret sensitive servers and their purpose, the directives from alphabet agencies, the brainstorming sessions about how to keep things like Russian Infiltration narratives alive, how to find more people a public official may have peed on, how to monitor potentially risky people who don't have a reach or have a low follow rate who may say something or bring up awkward questions.

I skimmed through all of it and only closely scrutinized a few items.

Nothing really that has not already been speculated on it before. Just details and what could be considered material evidence.

The flow charts are amusing. Flow charts used to ban people when they were not saying anything or doing anything that would usually promote a ban at Twitter or even elsewhere. They showed the steps used to prove the target said or meant something that they didn't either say or mean.

Twitter was beginning to have some real problems on their hands, pre Musk. Individuals and groups that were previously counted on not to oppose or rebel against the narrative began to make unflattering statements and even politicize themselves. Like the Walk Away Movement (fore ever banned), Bill Maher, and Gays Against Groomers.

Hoax or not it's doubtful anything will come of it in terms of alpha involvement, and censor ship.

Merry Christmas.

Gosh thats a wee bit gloomy Dia Be but yes there has been lots of lite shone on bigger fish scoops, getting returned to sea. Aslo the abc agencies involvment is okay amazes me, our dear Aragorn does not appear to see any concern about this aspect ( rite Aragorn ? ), so maybe some see a bigger 40.000 foot birdies eye view i cannot see.

[Aragorn]

Aslo the abc agencies involvment is okay amazes me, our dear Aragorn does not appear to see any concern about this aspect ( rite Aragorn ? )

Quoting from the article above, Vern... ↓

And it does not show any evidence that there was government involvement in the move to block the New York Post story, despite assertions by Musk and others.

[Aianawa]

Gosh i would have believed it impossible that an intelligent human being could take twittergate data in and not comprehend the abc's, how do you see their involvment not being negative or at least a wee bit corrupt ?, love to know Your feelings expressed Aragorn.

[modwiz]

NPR is a joke. Deserves a hoax thread for itself. Goob supported information. No better than fox. Parsing is always required.

Indpendent journalists are my source of intelligence. In every sense of the word.

Less showers required.

To each their own.

Only birdbrains need what the twitter files have shown.

Shit can be smelled without being seen.

[Aragorn]

Gosh i would have believed it impossible that an intelligent human being could take twittergate data in and not comprehend the abc's, how do you see their involvment not being negative or at least a wee bit corrupt ?, love to know Your feelings expressed Aragorn.

Read it again, Vern. It doesn't make any excuses for government intervention. It says that there is no evidence for government intervention, and that the claim that there would have been government intervention is a fabrication from Musk. You know, like Trump's claim that the elections had been stolen from him.

I've told you a dozen times before that the far-right will always resort to lies, libel and slander to win their case. And Musk has unfortunately aligned himself with the far-right. He has even already more or less admitted to that in public.

[Aianawa]

Mmmm okay Moddy, spose many already knew the stench, the coruption, the suffering caused by nefarioius past twitter acts but now seeing it was actual is nada interesting and of no connysquence Moddy, that your feel ?

[Fred Steeves]

Ahhh, Faux News, now there's a credible and unbiased news outlet. And again, I'm not surprised, because it is once again a right-wing information source — your favorite kind, isn't it?

Read and weep, my Hobbit friend... ↓


Source: NPR

Well now NPR, like "Democracy Now", ain't exactly what they used to be. This piece was by and large run of the mill establishment talking points. And just because FOX NEWS decided to run with it (because it's good for their team), doesn't mean it's not true.

Matt Taibbi, who originally broke "The Twitter Files", is one of the very few true journalists still left out there. He's no right wing or left wing hack. The evidence backs up the claims by him, and the other journalists breaking the same story that no one wants to see. This actually dovetails nicely with what I've been pointing out recently concerning societal manipulation:
[TWITTER]https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1606749009875709952[/TWITTER]



At 5 minutes in, Mark Zuckerburg himself confirms what NPR (ahum), somehow fails to mention. That would be a direct FBI interface when it comes to moderating content. It would also be the lie of omission.

What do the documents show?

The Twitter Files might not be the bombshell Musk teased in popcorn emoji-laden tweets — but they offer an illuminating glimpse into the sausage-making of content moderation.

They show Twitter executives and rank and file employees grappling with difficult tradeoffs, questioning the company's rules and how they should be applied — and in some cases, getting things wrong.

Take Twitter's decision right before the 2020 presidential election to briefly block users from sharing a New York Post story alleging shady business dealings by then-candidate Joe Biden's son, Hunter, in Ukraine.

The article was based on files from Hunter Biden's laptop, which the Post said it got from Trump's private attorney, Rudy Giuliani, and former Trump adviser Steve Bannon. At the time, it was unclear whether that material was authentic. After being burned by the Russian hack and leak of Democratic National Committee emails in 2016, tech companies were on edge over the possibility of a repeat — and so Twitter decided to restrict the Post story.

Citing its rules against sharing hacked material containing private information, the company showed a warning to anyone who tried to post a link to the article saying it was "potentially harmful." It also suspended the New York Post's own Twitter account until it deleted its tweets about the story. (Facebook was alarmed by the article, too, but didn't go as far as Twitter. It allowed the link to be posted, but limited distribution of those posts while its outside fact-checkers reviewed the claims.)

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN3PIGLDscQ


We have shadow banning, censorship, with deep state entities such as the FBI and Homeland Security setting the pace for what's acceptable speech, and non acceptable speech. In a just society this should rise to the level of constitutional crisis, but of course we blasted through those warning signs long ago, now we just don't want anyone to rock the boat.

I mean well, you can rock the boat all you want, so long as you're playing for the right team.

[Aianawa]

Read it again, Vern. It doesn't make any excuses for government intervention. It says that there is no evidence for government intervention, and that the claim that there would have been government intervention is a fabrication from Musk. You know, like Trump's claim that the elections had been stolen from him.

I've told you a dozen times before that the far-right will always resort to lies, libel and slander to win their case. And Musk has unfortunately aligned himself with the far-right. He has even already more or less admitted to that in public.

FFS sake dont bring your Trump into it please Aragorn, imo makes ya look dirty. yes reading it again makes me feel like they have a dont look there , listen to me energy goin on. But as you have told me many times, truth is mind n brain co-ordinated from where one wishes or imo ones brain n or mind need not be needed sometimes, just the feel, i respect your feel mate.

[Diabolical Boids]

I'm confused how journalist Matt Taibbi, contributor to Rolling Stone (liberal) and author of Insane Clown Presidency (anti Trump expose-) and Elon Musk were both darlings of the liberal media just months ago but the moment either of them mentioned a moderate view that admonishes censorship, and surveillance, that is coincidentally held by other political parties, are now only serving far right interests. I'd like to emphasize the difference between liberal, and far left for the sake of clarity. A move too far either to the left or right results in fascist tactics. How is one form of fascism better than the other is beyond me.

But it happened to Bill Maher who has been a liberal (not a leftist) since forever. T

I believe and I may be wrong but I believe the post that stated the Federal Government wasn't involved either meant no member of the Executive Office could be immediately linked back to any of this. I'll double check if I find it and see the exact wording. It's literally a mountain of articles and artifacts to sift through.

[Diabolical Boids]

A link to the documents of the most recent drop. It mentions a lot about the federal government involvement or rather specifically those who are not part of the Cabinet but still answer to the Executive Office.

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/twitte...utm_medium=web

The only artifact I could find that says anything about the federal government not being involved is about a specific account. Suspension of Julian Assange's account was apparently not attributed to interference by the Federal Government but suspended due to abandonment. Taibbi publicly spoke out against Assange's captivity and extradition.