Why Twitter needs changed

Exact same headline, one is fine, the other is “misleading “.

How to fix? IDK.

Not censoring factual information would be a great place to start.

Huh, pretty easy don’t you think?

Or, maybe don’t hire ignorant, agenda driven buffoons to do your “fact checking”.

True. I don’t get why the Tweet was flagged, it’s not like it said if you’re fully vaxxed you won’t be hospitalized or die from Covid. :grin:

It’s clearly automated. They don’t have enough humans to be checking every tweet.

How the fuck can it be automated?
It is literally the exact same words!!

Not all of it is exact. I don’t know how the process works, but I seriously doubt they have humans checking every tweet or every news source.

Part of Musk’s alleged plan is to make the process more transparent, possibly open-source. We’ll see how that goes.

Understatement of the millenia!!!

Nobody does, that is why the algorithms need to be open source.

No, just the ones that they have an axe to grind with politically.

OKay…the headlines are not exactly the same. The first one says due to a rare but serious blood clot risk. The other said that the Covid 19 vaccine causes blood clots. No mention of rare. So that second headline is one that folks like tsz will pick up and claim that the “jab” is killing people.

Because most people read just the headline and nothing more - I can agree that the second headline is misleading. The post wasn’t banned - just labeled as misleading.

Words have power. So does a lack of even a couple of words. Which headline sounds more like “Dirty Laundry”… a warning about restrictions due to a rare but serious risk of blood clots, or a “blood clot risk”?

except the first headline mentioned included the words “rare but serious” and the second one didn’t. And IMO, those 3 words do make a difference. The difference being, the second one is likely to find it’s way to a conspiracy theory website. And the more it get shared…the more people miss “rare but serious”.

For fucks sake!

Ask tsz which headline he likes better…the one that says it impacts a few people, or the one that implies it impacts far more people.

The Ministry of Truth would prefer you write your controversial headlines in a wordier way.

The AP did a fabulous job upholding the pro-vaccine narrative—I mean correct opinion. Breaking 911, not so much.

But according to parrot - they were identical posts. And when it comes to covid…I know of people who bought every conspiracy theory about the vaccine. And the second headline is more fitting for a conspiracy theory.

And…has been illustrated in other posts - those conspiracy theory followers (Republicans) need to be explicitly told things because they are unable to think and process for themselves. And it was your side saying that (indirectlly). If they wouldn’t attack a capitol because Trump never said “attack the capitol”, but may have implied it with “fight like hell…if you don’t your democracy will die”. So without the explicit, descriptive words, may will think that “the jab kills people”. Just ask tsz.

I know it, KC. And the obvious solution is a ton of censorship, including censorship by bots run amok so that leftie apologists like mcarley can deflect any criticism by shrugging & saying “Can’t help it…it’s the bots…” :person_shrugging:

If we just censor enough, then people who fall for conspiracy theories will no longer fall for them.

IT wasn’t deleted… IT was still there and labeled ‘misleading’, which it is. It can’t be shared (good). If words don’t matter, here’ my flight instruction class

  1. Get in Plane
  2. Start engine
  3. Fly

All of it correct, but there is more to the story.

That’s still censorship, Einstein.

Watching you bend into a pretzel making excuses for this is truly nauseating.

YOu call it censorship I call in clarification. BUT…I would be ‘informed’ and you would be reading what you want to believe.

Like a true Democrat, in patent ignorance of the Orwellian farce happening all around you.