Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter, about Twitter, on Twitter:
We’ve made the decision to stop all political advertising on Twitter globally. We believe political message reach should be earned, not bought.
[…]This isn’t about free expression. This is about paying for reach. And paying to increase the reach of political speech has significant ramifications that today’s democratic infrastructure may not be prepared to handle. It’s worth stepping back in order to address.
Both candidate ads and issue ads will be banned, although ads to encourage people to register to vote will still be allowed. This is clearly a case of Twitter simply not wanting to be part of the problem during the 2020 election cycle in the US, and it’s an easy goal to score for Dorsey after Facebook said earlier last week that it has no issues with allowing lying ads or nazi publishers on its platform.
https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1189656220103323651
I would say that counts as political advertising, is that something that will be banned? And i apologise now, as that (the content of the tweet) is topical right now here in the uk.
I am not from UK! Isn’t that tweet from that tweeter user ‘directly’. I think what they are talking about is just an ad that you don’t see which user has sent, and it won’t matter if you are following them or not. But you can post garbage with no restriction as long as some policies are followed (I am not sure what they are).
That was covered by Twitter. They banned promotional “push” political advertising where customers pay to push their message to people who are probably not followers.
There’s literally nothing wrong with allowing Nazi publishers. You can just choose not to read them.
Tidux speaks like a true nazi: There’s nothing wrong with allowing people whose ideology is the extermination of those of a different race to be allowed to spread that message.
Just like there’s nothing wrong with allowing murderers to spread the message that murdering is good and beneficial for everyone.
It would makes the internet so much look like… the internet. Flatists and creationists can already speak all their theories, you indeed no have to listen to them if you don’t believe in their fantasies. Now if you believe, you don’t have to be an ass and force/murder people into your own self centered beliefs. That’s just common sense.
There is nothing wrong (in principle) with allowing them to discuss their ideas.
The moment they try to implement them though, that changes.
According to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech what you say is true in Indonesia, Japan, the United States and maybe Spain,. I cheeked Russia separately and it’s not true there either. You can be a closet Nazi publisher but stating your racist ideals will get you fined and imprisoned. I believe it is the job of the legislature to prevent Naziizm, not left up to profit & publicity seeking media organisations, or OS Blogs. Alas in the United States it is open media warfare and Nazi right to free speech needs to be attacked. And if you defend it you run the risk of being called a Nazi, even though you are not. And after a while both the attackers and defenders of Nazism will end up both looking like Nazis as they advocate increasing retribution on each other. Just look at the tactics of Anti-Fa and all the freedom fighters come dictators out there.. It’s a bad situation.
Have you tried not being a retard? Free speech means free speech, regardless of how politically uncomfortable it makes you.
I see nothing wrong with banning political ads. We’re already bombarded by ads in the press, tv, and billboards.
If they want to fix the election fake news problem they should just add a dislike button to tweets.
So… what’s OSNews’ position on political sponsorship then?
Would OSNews permit a political sponsor? If so, indiscriminately or only selectively?
Is OSNews’ position on this matter within David’s (Owner/publisher) or Thom’s (Editorial) jurisdiction?