Twitter is a horrible place, run by horrible people (see
TWITTER CEO JACK DORSEY STOPS PRETENDING, SAYS "WE CAN'T AFFORD TO BE NEUTRAL ANYMORE"
TIM POOL SCHOOLS TWITTER EXECUTIVES ON THEIR LEFTIST BIAS
). It's the least used platform, yet has the most influence because it's popular with the three groups most desperate for instant gratification: politicians, celebrities, and the media. And while this may not be a popular opinion here, it
even be worth Trump having his Twitter account taken away, just because the ensuing response would destroy Twitter. Trump can then communicate with constituents the old-school way: by cutting in while we're trying to watch television. Twitter sucks, is what I'm saying. Also, you can find me at @Brodigan.
Twitter so screwed the pooch with its "fact" "check" of Trump on mail-in voter fraud, it caused sentient being The Zuck-2000 to be activated and criticize Twitter.
We have a different policy than Twitter on this. I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldn't be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online. I think in general, private companies probably shouldn't be — especially these platform companies — shouldn't be in the position of doing that.
Case in point, this is the assclown Twitter has in charge of fact-checking Donald Trump.
In all seriousness, the whole concept of "fact" "checking" in the olden days used to just be called journalism. So when a "journalist" uses an "independent" "fact" "checker" as a source, don't listen to that guy. What we call fact-checking is mostly nitpicking over rhetoric, complaining about tone, and taking something that while true didn't include as much context as this "independent" "fact" "checker" would have preferred. As far as who I trust to be an arbiter of truth, tech nerds are literally the bottom of the list.
Plus what Trump said about mail-in ballot fraud wasn't wrong.
Trump Is Wrong about Mail-In-Ballots... Because Twitter and CNN Said So | Good Morning Mug Club
Not subscribed to the podcast?
It's completely free.