Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
What do people want to actually happen as a result of the 'Twitter files'? So far the leaks show the moderation decisions were made by Twitter staff and were not forced to do so by the Government, the Government and the Biden campaign complained about things but the former didn't use their power to force things down and the latter didn't have the power.
So is the complaint that the Government didn't step in to put restrictions on the ability what Twitter can allow or refuse? And is telling a private company that they must permit certain content actually breaking the first amendment? After all forced speech isn't free speech.
|
It's a very good question.
I think it's all largely noise with politicians seeking an organisation to blame and to galvanise their supporters. Twitter is a good lightning rod for their complaints given the nature of the site. Perhaps some hope that if there's a lot of whingeing from their side then Twitter may treat them more generously.
At the end of the day, Twitter's main weakness is its lack of profitability. But cutting costs too much can lead to illegal activities and increasing revenue needs to be handled carefully as the Blue Tick debate demonstrates.