- Nov 30, 2006
- Hickory, MS
He was removed from social media while still in office. Pretty remarkable if you think about it.Amazing how quickly Republicans forget that Trump used the power of the Oval Office in his own battle to get social media platforms to bend to his will.
They miss him so much they can't stop talking about him. Actually they miss the revenue from clicks he generated for them.
You mean like a typical politician. "misinformation" is the newspeak word redefinition of the week.Of course, he was doing so for his own personal and political gain, and his grave concern was that he was being called out for lies and misinformation.
perhaps the current administration needs to review their own track record wrt incorrect statements.The Biden administration, OTOH, is instead concerned with limiting the flow of misinformation and in the process possibly helping to save the lives of ordinary American citizens.
indeed there are propaganda machines pushing divisive screeds (text generating robots , etc)... Conservatives are not trying to destroy our system of government.Further, from what I can tell, this is more about pointing out to Facebook et al that a small number of sources are responsible for most of the COVID disinformation, and trying to get the platforms to do more to control it.
Do you think Facebook can not identify them? Just like phone companies could stop robocalls except for the revenue they would lose.
The research they cite is from an independent source and did not originate from within the Biden administration (as much as the shrill voices on the right might wish that to be the case.)
PSAKI said:"The Office of the Surgeon General has upped its tracking of "disinformation" related to the coronavirus pandemic on social media platforms, the press secretary said during a press briefing."
President Biden accused Facebook of killing people but that probably wasn't scripted for him.Social media platforms are structured in a way that is far more likely to promulgate scary lies than mundane truths. Even in the best of times this is problematic; during a public health crisis it's downright dangerous.
The hyperbole meter needle is broken from pegging full up so many times.
"Pearl clutching"....what are you talking about? I assume that is supposed to be some kind of insult.Asking social media sites to do their job a little better does not seem like a significant threat to free speech, despite the pearl-clutching right wing freakout.
Do you think big tech is a positive force in modern culture? Section 230 should be repealed to make them responsible for their publications.It's worth noting as well that Biden, as far as we know, has not played the Section 230 blackmail gambit as Trump did on more than one occasion in his battles with social media platforms.
PS: I was going to coin the phrase "soft fascism" but some blog beat me to it. IMO The partnership between big tech/social media and government is unhealthy for free speech and democracy.
"Soft fascism is a process of anti-democratic governing that is not as overtly totalitarian or authoritarian as more historically memorable fascist states. Soft fascist governing has features like: corrupt electoral processes; legislative tactics that undermine democratic engagement."