Yeah, anyone can make some pass saying they are a journalist. It requires a color printer, and a laminating machine, and a piece of string.

It's been admitted the arrest was wrong you silly people.

"Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has apologized for the "totally unacceptable" arrest of a CNN journalist and his crew who were covering protests over the death of George Floyd."

https://www.newsweek.com/minnesota-gov-tim-walz-apologizes-cnn-teams-unacceptable-arrest-journalists-released-1507326

A certain arrogance is associated with having factual certitude about what is good. And as facts and opinions blend into one, the facts of the situation are also what they like the facts to be.

Anyone can print a badge that says 'governor'. It was probably the Chinese who apologized.

So now it's undeniable fact that the arrest was wrong?

I see the Governor is a little bit left-wing lol...wouldn't be trying to point score would he ?

:lol:

If every adult US person stops using Twitter because of this it will affect 6% of its user base. Considering that less than 50% of americans agree with Trump to the point they'd leave Twitter, it's at most a 3% effect. I suspect Dorset said "fuck it, I'm rich bitch!"

Enter the Koch brothers and Murdoch with a hostile take over?

When a company loses its way other companies fill the void...

Twitter have got away with not enforcing rules in the past by saying it is too much to police the system, so a 1980's law let them carry on...now they are policing those they disagree with that law should be repealed. Twitter would be fucked were that to happen , they would get sued for every falsehood that made it to their platform.

Have you noticed Zuckerberg is not taking Twitter's side, he can see what's coming.

You can't substantiate they are doing it to those they disagree with. Trump is just a high profile user. If done correctly the fact checking will finally do something about the echo chambers.

Mark disagrees with you...


Mark Zuckerberg says social networks should not be fact-checking political speech

Ask yourself this...have they ever done it to a mainstream left-leaning politician...if not does that mean all such politicians are utterly truthful ? I think we know the answer, don't you.

And I disagree with Mark. First off, the "fact checking" isn't deciding what's true or not so Mark creates a straw man and then puts it down. Totally uninteresting. What I don't get is what you think is wrong with providing different sides of the debate by offering other opinions.

In the end, Mark doesn't like things that affect his bottom line. Probably Dorsey doesn't either. So both their opinions need to be taken with a grain of salt.

I guess they weren’t intimidated by the big scary orange man. :razz:

"Means you don't understand. Learning the difference between fact and opinion is basic like learning abc and basic arithmetic. It is not a choice what you want to believe what a fact is and what an opinion is."

How do I know who is telling the truth about existence when there is no way anyone can know such a thing without some degree of faith. Faith and opinion are bound together.

"fact checking" is a slur on what's been written to be fact checked ...and it's also a slur on the reader who can make his own mind up without guidance from Twitter. Seriously, do you feel that you need guidance from Twitter?

See , that kind of stuff gets written by teenagers.

Ah, first fact checking was a violation of human rights.

Now it's a slur.

I wonder what's next :chin:

Ask yourself this...have they ever done it to a mainstream left-leaning politician...if not does that mean all such politicians are utterly truthful ? I think we know the answer, don't you. — Chester

What left-leaning politician with a reasonable following has been lying about methods of voting in order to protect the interests of his own party? Trump just admitted as much that his resistance to mail-in voting is to avoid a Republican loss.

That's not because only Democrats would act fraudulently, or "are [all Republicans] utterly truthful" according to you? It's because covid-19 disproportionally affects non-white US citizens who tend to vote Democratic more often. Denying them the ability to vote via mail-in ballots is the ploy and that's the real violation of rights here. Not a little link beneath the President's unsubstantiated claims.

Imagine if you were on the phone and the phone company had the right to just intercede now and then to fact check you....

You must be over 60 that you think that comparison is sensible in any way.

I don't trust postal voting at all ...in Britain most people are aware that such a system gets abused, so I don't blame Trump for being wary of it.

Are you talking about my phone idea? If so ,have you heard of speaker phones where you are broadcasting to more than one person? Or when someone phones into a radio station?

I'm 53 lol.

Where are the facts this actually happens? I don't care about your opinion and I certainly don't care about your appeal to a majority. Most people say all Englishmen have crooked teeth. Can't back it up but it's true!

See , that kind of stuff gets written by teenagers. — Chester

Glorifying violence is adolescent, I must agree. Too much video game playing in the White House?

There is widespread abuse of postal votes. In one case, private data held by a third party for legitimate purposes was used to apply for postal votes, and then intercepted before electors had a chance to complete them. The victims would not make a formal complaint as they feared retribution.

The left glorifies violence when it involves smashing up Target though, doesn't it? — Chester

No, one commits violence when smashing up a target.

Did you accidentally put that comma there or are you saying those scumbags that smashed up the Target shop were acting with violence? Most leftists on this site couldn't give a fuck about that shop as long as its destruction helps stir up trouble for Trump....

Now you have substituted your opinion for someone else's peppered with some anecdotal evidence of failed attempts. For the UK. But we're talking about the US.

And we mustn't forget that regular voter fraud in booths happen too. Buying votes, happens there too. It's about the effect of voter fraud via postal voting compared to in booth voting and then how those risks can be managed and how those risk controls could be implemented on time to make it a good addition to booth voting.

I think there's legitimate concern to be had where States that have no experience and no infrastructure to handle massive mail in ballots but I think it's stupid to exclude the possibility of mail in ballot voting entirely. There are six states working with all-postal voting (Hawaii, Oregon, California, Washington State, Utah and Colorado). There's no evidence this has contributed to substantial voter fraud.

Such schemes are incredibly hard to pull off undetected. A fraud big enough to swing any but the very closest elections is easily caught by looking for statistical outliers in vote totals, checking signatures and conducting basic detective work. Carrying an entire state election by mail ballot fraud would be a nigh-impossible triumph of concealment in all but a harrowingly close contest. — NYT

It's all about how you organise all-post voting. It shouldn't be a partisan issue.