Re: Twitter says it 'inadvertently' blocked users from liking and replying to some of Trump's tweets about the election that violated its rules

On 12/15/20 2:26 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:
> https://news.yahoo.com/twitter-says-inadvertently-blocked-users-
> 153326080.html
> 
> Twitter on Saturday briefly took new action to stem the spread of
> President Donald Trump's false tweets about his loss in the 2020 election.
> 
> Replies and likes were disabled on several of Trump's tweets Saturday
> morning before Twitter the company reversed course hours later, telling
> Business Insider the change was made "inadvertently."
> 
> Throughout 2020, Twitter has attempted to curb misinformation on the
> platform, though the company has long said it allows the president's
> account and posts to remain on the platform because they are of public
> interest.
> 
> Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.
> 
> Twitter on Saturday appeared to take further steps to prevent its users
> from interacting with tweets from President Donald Trump that shared
> inaccurate information about the 2020 election, briefly blocking users
> from liking and replying to some of his tweets before it backtracked.
> 
> Several users noted the change on the platform early Saturday, which was
> first applied to Trump's tweet that claimed the "people of the United
> States were cheated, and our Country is disgraced" following the Supreme
> Court's latest refusal on Friday to hear a longshot bid to overturn the
> results.
> 
> When users attempted to like or reply to the tweets, they were instead met
> with a messaging explaining why Twitter had disabled the features.
> 
> - ADVERTISEMENT -
> "We try to prevent a Tweet like this that otherwise breaks the Twitter
> Rules from reaching more people, so we've disabled most of the ways to
> engage with it," the label said.
> 
> But hours after, just before 10 a.m., with no public statement from
> Twitter, it appeared to have changed course, allowing users to like the
> tweets after first presenting a large warning that the contents of the
> post were disputed.
> 
> Trump twitter
> Just before 10 a.m. Saturday, Twitter appeared to reverse course, allowing
> users reply to and like Trump's tweets. Twitter
> "We inadvertently took action to limit engagements on the labeled Tweet
> you referenced," a Twitter spokesperson told Business Insider on Saturday.
> "This action has been reversed, and you can now engage with the Tweet, but
> in line with our Civic Integrity Policy policy it will continue to be
> labeled in order to give more context for anyone who might see the Tweet."
> 
> While Trump lost the election to President-elect Joe Biden in November, he
> has refused to accept the results, launching a disinformation campaign
> that has leveraged false allegations of widespread voter fraud by
> Democrats and a number of failed lawsuits in an attempt to overturn the
> results.
> 
> As part of its effort to combat misinformation and disinformation on the
> platform ahead of the election, Twitter earlier this year limited users'
> ability to retweet posts, adding "extra friction" in encouraging them to
> comment rather than sharing them without context.
> 
> Despite Trump's flouting of Twitter policies throughout his tenure as
> president, the company has long said it allowed his account to remain
> without suspension or termination because his posts were deemed newsworthy
> and of public interest despite their violation of the Twitter rules.
> 
> Earlier this year, Twitter began fact-checking some of Trump's posts,
> sparking anger and executive action from the president, who alleged that
> social-media companies were biased against conservatives. In May, Twitter
> had hidden a tweet from the president behind a warning stating it
> glorified violence, though the company allowed the tweet to remain on the
> platform.
> 
> Read the original article on Business Insider
> 
> 
> 
Lawsuits should be filed.  Where was Bob Barr?

-- 
That's Karma


                      *Mama'says*
206 - "The individual mandate forces individuals into commerce precisely 
because they elected to refrain from commercial activity," says Justice 
Roberts. "Such a law cannot be sustained under a clause authorizing 
Congress to 'regulate Commerce.'"