#twitter

Twitter took a knife to a gunfight

What did Twitter expect? The only reason the social media platform stuck a CNN fact check after Trump’s tweet regarding mail-in ballots was to give him a bloody nose. Nothing more. President Trump is known for his embellishments on most posts. What was new? It is his style.

In any event, as we mentioned yesterday, Twitter strayed from being an impartial (we use that expression lightly) social media platform to an overt media network with deep-seated political bias.

Twitter picked a fight purely of its own volition and chose to exercise that on the worst possible target. It poked a bear thinking the cage was locked.

To date, these social media platforms have been able to avoid lawsuits related to what their users post.

The suggestion is that Trump will make an executive order which would allow the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to allow people to seek remedy through the courts.

Given the blatant bias exhibited by these social media giants, this proposed amendment to the legislation would protect free speech, not curtail it.

The left will howl at the injustice and brand Trump a tyrant. What else is new? Little do they realize that in order to enshrine free speech, all views must be given an equal voice, even those they disagree with.

Twitter has long had this coming. 100% self inflicted wound.

Never carry a knife to a gunfight.

The best description of Twitter ever

yoelroth

If anyone wants to be informed, Twitter is one of the least likely platforms to find it. A fair and neutral playground marshalled by an unbiased hall monitor? Pfffft. We have included the best description of Twitter ever at the end. First some context.

Twitter updated its new rules on May 11th, 2020 vis-a-vis fact-checking and integrity. Of course, the platform, like YouTube and Facebook, decides what it deems appropriate. Who could forget when Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified before the Senate that Silicon Valley – where most of the tech world is headquartered – is “an extremely left-leaning place” and the evidence shows what side of politics gets fact-checked.

Twitter’s Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth (@yoyoel) is an avid anti-Trumper. Several days after the 2016 election he proudly tweeted, “I’m just saying, we fly over those states that voted for a racist tangerine for a reason.” We should sleep soundly at night that he also referred to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as “a personality-free bag of farts.” Surely there is no risk of conservative bias with the integrity team at Twitter…sleep soundly.

Recall the time The NY Times hired Sarah Jeong who had tweeted “Cancel White People” among a laundry list of crude bile. Twitter did nothing despite being exposed and the newspaper endorsed her hire regardless (she has since been let go). Black conservative, Candace Owens exchanged the words “white” for “Jewish” and “Black” and was swiftly suspended.

F3570C69-B33D-4BA2-B56F-39A01CEA5DAD.jpeg

We wrote yesterday of our amusement that Twitter chose to use a brazenly anti-Trump media outlet like CNN, which has been regularly caught lying to fact-check the president. How amusing it was to hear White House Counsel Kellyanne Conway tell reporters how the media has no problems immediately retweeting items without a second’s thought to verifying.

Stephen Fry perhaps made the most accurate description of the social media site a few years back.

It’s no big deal – as it shouldn’t be. But yes, for anyone interested I have indeed deactivated my Twitter account…It’s quite simple really: the room had started to smell. Really quite bad.

Oh goodness, what fun Twitter was in the early days, a secret bathing-pool in a magical glade in an enchanted forest. It was glorious ‘to turn as swimmers into cleanness leaping.’ We frolicked and water-bombed and sometimes, in the moonlight, skinny-dipped. We chattered and laughed and put the world to rights and shared thoughts sacred, silly and profane. But now the pool is stagnant. It is frothy with scum, clogged with weeds and littered with broken glass, sharp rocks and slimy rubbish. If you don’t watch yourself, with every move you’ll end up being gashed, broken, bruised or contused. Even if you negotiate the sharp rocks you’ll soon feel that too many people have peed in the pool for you to want to swim there any more. The fun is over.

To leave that metaphor, let us grieve at what Twitter has become. A stalking ground for the sanctimoniously self-righteous who love to second-guess, to leap to conclusions and be offended – worse, to be offended on behalf of others they do not even know. It’s as nasty and unwholesome a characteristic as can be imagined. It doesn’t matter whether they think they’re defending women, men, transgender people, Muslims, humanists … the ghastliness is absolutely the same. It makes sensible people want to take an absolutely opposite point of view. I’ve heard people shriek their secularism in such a way as to make me want instantly to become an evangelical Christian…

The realities of crowdfunding & the evils of social media

No doubt many of you will have seen the viral video posted by the mother of Quaden Bayles, a child with dwarfism who was allegedly bullied at school.

Famous actors, sports stars and media personalities rallied in support of the disabled kid. If only the same could be said of over 90% of the 256,700 people that shared his GoFundMe page instead of contributing themselves. That’s right, in today’s virtue signalling world, appealing that you care about social justice is enough.

Although the ugly side of social media is never far away. It didn’t take long for trolls seeking to demonize anyone by dredging up the past and drawing conclusions in haste. Digital footprints have a half-life of infinity.

Some suggested that his mother was abusing his skills as an actor, influencer and model to make some extra money by boosting his profile. If this was a stunt, which we sincerely hope it wasn’t, that would be an even more despicable act at the hands of those who should be protecting his best interests.

img_5096-1

Ultimately, 9-yo Quaden Bayles should simply not be in the firing line. Sadly he will be collateral damage as a growing number have taken upon themselves to savage him and his mother. That is not to condone any alleged deceptive behaviour but it throws up the growing dangers of social media. An exponential number of people seem so desperate to have their profiles go viral that they are resorting to ever more extreme actions to achieve it.

The GoFundMe account to support Quaden has amassed c.US$455,000 from 20,100 people for him and his mother to go to Disneyland. As doubt to the authenticity of the bullying claim does the rounds in cyberspace, the mother is being attacked for using his disability to raise some quick cash via GoFundMe. The facts don’t show that.

First, she didn’t ask to set up the GoFundMe account. Comedian Brad Williams did. Second, the organiser clearly stated that “after all the flights, hotel, tickets, and food is paid for, any excess money will be donated to anti-bullying/anti-abuse charities.

We won’t bother to make some sort of woke comment to condemn bullying of any sort because that should be the default setting for anyone with at least two brain cells. There are no points for publicly broadcasting one is against attacking a child with a disability. Or without one for that matter.

Still in this day and age, we should never underestimate the actions of some who gladly look to hijack a “trending” cause for their own social media exposure.

Hollywood is a great example. How so many actors and actresses came out and rallied behind the #MeToo movement despite Harvey Weinstein being the worst kept secret in movies. Celebrities rushed to condemn his actions on Twitter despite wearing black ball gowns with the surface area of three postage stamps held together with dental floss to protest sexual assault. That’s right, when it comes to career progression and fame, expedience by remaining silent trumped principle.

If people wish to part with their money on GoFundMe we think they bear all the personal responsibility of doing so. At the very least, GoFundMe should consider a 7-day cooling-off period where the money is held in trust such that the impulsive have an avenue to reverse a decision if any misrepresentation which changes their decision crops up. The cross-jurisdictional nightmare of charging a fundraiser for potential fraud makes it too complex, much less for the generally small average size of individual donations.

Today, social media is judge and jury. People are smeared before getting a chance to prove their innocence. For all of the video footage and pictures of Quaden Bayles dressed in designer fashion several years prior to his emotional plea this week, it doesn’t automatically cancel out the chances he was bullied by his peers who probably don’t know any better. He may have given as good as he got. He is only 9-yo. It is ultimately irrelevant. We know bullying has dreadful consequences, sometimes fatal. It shouldn’t just come down to seeing a video of a disabled kid before we do something about it.

Unfortunately, the lessons about the dangers of bullying so many demand kids are taught aren’t practised by the very adults on social media who should know better.

Something kids will fear way more than climate change

Image result for teenagers smartphones selfies climate strike

Is there one thing greater than climate change that can cause children irreparable harm? Yes. Perhaps the kids attending the school climate strikes tomorrow ought to consider that the very smartphone devices that they can’t put down are also harmful to the environment. Will these kids happily give up their smartphones in a quest to save the planet? Will these kids be willing to give up Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook and Twitter to save their own lives? Not in a million years.

An abstract of a report on the impact of technological devices on GHG emissions by Belkhir & Elmeligi, titled, ‘Assessing ICT global emissions footprint: Trends to 2040 & recommendations is as follows,

In light of the concerted efforts to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) per the so-called Paris Agreement, the Information and Communication Industry (ICT) has received little attention as a significant contributor to GHGE and if anything is often highly praised for enabling efficiencies that help reduce other industry sectors footprint. In this paper, we aim at assessing the global carbon footprint of the overall ICT industry, including the contribution from the main consumer devices, the data centers and communication networks, and compare it with the to the total worldwide GHGE. We conduct a detailed and rigorous analysis of the ICT global carbon footprint, including both the production and the operational energy of ICT devices, as well as the operational energy for the supporting ICT infrastructure. We then compare this contribution to the global 2016-level GHGE. We have found that, if unchecked, ICT GHGE relative contribution could grow from roughly 1–1.6% in 2007 to exceed 14% of the 2016-level worldwide GHGE by 2040, accounting for more than half of the current relative contribution of the whole transportation sector. Our study also highlights the contribution of smartphones and shows that by 2020, the footprint of smartphones alone would surpass the individual contribution of desktops, laptops and displays. Finally, we offer some actionable recommendations on how to mitigate and curb the ICT explosive GHGE footprint, through a combination of renewable energy use, tax policies, managerial actions and alternative business models.”

The study found that the relative emissions share of smartphones is expected to grow to 11% by 2020, exceeding the individual contributions of PCs, laptops and computer displays.

In absolute values, emissions caused by smartphones will jump from 17Mt to 125Mt of CO2 equivalent per year (Mt-CO2e/yr) in that time span or +730%. Most of this occurs at the production stage. Nevertheless with mobile carriers encouraging shorter cycles to upgrade this will only get worse.

ICT will grow from 215Mt-CO2e/yr in 2007 to 764 MtCO2-e/yr by 2020, with data centres (storing all those photos) accounting for about two-thirds of the total contribution.

For comparison purposes, the entire carbon footprint of Australia was about 550 MtCO2-e in 2018.

CM guesses these kids ought to be walking to school too. It is a great lesson in what real sacrifice means. At least they got the day off school.

Harsh but true

It is hardly statesmanlike to tweet off insults but there is a horrible truth to what Trump wrote about Khan and de Blasio. London crime has got out of control. CM wrote about it last year. However should we be the least bit surprised Trump slammed him on Twitter? De Blasio was trashed by his own NYPD for his incompetence. So harsh words that carry a lot of truth.

Not to make a two wrongs argument, but Sadiq Khan made some pretty disparaging remarks about POTUS ahead of his visit so he was inviting a bloody nose from a man with a glass jaw. Khan’s comments led Her Majesty to leave him off the official invite list for the Trump state dinner. Clearly she knows the long history of the UK-US relationship is more important than pandering to the whims of a weak,virtue signaling identity politics loving appeaser. Queen Elizabeth has never forgotten the special friendship she grew up with 80 years ago.

Or maybe we should question the utterly childish antics of the Shadow Foreign Minister Emily Thornberry who called for a mass protest against Trump on June 4? It would be understandable if Idi Amin had visited but this is the UK’s strongest ally which has a democratically elected head of state. Yet Thornberry railed at Trump as if the UK was in a state of war with America. Only proves how unfit Labour is to govern.

When will the left realize they only do his bidding when they let Trump Derangement Syndrome consume them?

The Mueller Madness form guide

The NY Post put forward this interesting schematic to let people vote for who they think was the most worthy contender for frothing at the mouth over the Mueller investigation. Such a strong field. From MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow welling up on hearing the news of the president’s exoneration to Kathy Griffin tweeting furiously about his collusion. The main networks dedicated 2,300 minutes of coverage on this investigation over 2 years with 90% negative coverage. So much for objective journalism.

In having to accept the bitter taste of defeat, the apologies from the mainstream media have not been forthcoming. According to CNN’s Brain Stelter, “you’re going to hear from the right that the press just made all this up to take down President Trump…the press was just following a trail Trump created“. Perhaps they might ponder who was behind these accusations. Maybe liberals will call for an investigation into Bob Mueller because they didn’t like the result of his investigation?

When will the Democrats finally focus on policy to win an argument instead of allowing the media to handhold them through a two year mental disorder? Trump Derangement Syndrome should be added to the next DSM volume. It is really that insane.

Twitter bias – who’d of thunk?

Judge for yourself on whether Twitter targets particular groups. Think Sarah Jeong faced no Twitter ban for calling to #CancelWhitePeople whereas black conservative Candace Owens got a suspension for changing Jeong’s words from “white” to “Jewish” and “black”.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg openly admitted in a congressional testimony that Silicon Valley was littered with people from the far left. Think of poor old #WalkAway activist Brendan Straka , the articulate, openly gay hairdresser who was suspended for 30 days for highlighting he’d appear on the then banned InfoWars. Not for posting a video.  Just that he’d appear.

The publishing of Google’s internal post-election debrief video shouldn’t have surprised anyone in the slightest. All the outer appeals to the group’s impartiality were smashed by this leaked video. In a sense Google was the victim of the half-life nature of the very digital media feeds it seeks to control. Even worse it was all the senior management talking about what really goes on behind closed doors.

Sunlight is truly the best disinfectant.

Musk charged with securities violations

F52C5B1C-71A6-4BC6-9339-4CDDC6AD7F10

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has been accused by the SEC of violating Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5]. The SEC claimed,

“Musk’s false and misleading public statements and omissions caused significant confusion and disruption in the market for Tesla’s stock and resulting harm to investors…Musk knew or was reckless in not knowing that each of these statements was false and/or misleading because he did not have an adequate basis in fact for his assertions. When he made these statements, Musk knew that he had never discussed a going-private transaction at $420 per share with any potential funding source, had done nothing to investigate whether it would be possible for all current investors to remain with Tesla as a private company via a “special purpose fund,” and had not confirmed support of Tesla’s investors for a potential going private transaction. He also knew that he had not satisfied numerous additional contingencies, the resolution of which was highly uncertain, when he unequivocally declared, ‘Only reason why this is not certain is that it’s contingent on a shareholder vote.’ Musk’s public statements and omissions created the misleading impression that taking Tesla private was subject only to Musk choosing to do so and a shareholder vote.”

The eccentric and maverick CEO responded,

This unjustified action by the SEC leaves me deeply saddened and disappointed. I have always taken action in the best interests of truth, transparency and investors. Integrity is the most important value in my life and the facts will show I never compromised this in any way.”

It is common knowledge to corporates that the exchange is the first port of call for all public releases to be openly documented for consistency and equal access. It is irrelevant whether a social media feed might be deemed as “in the spirit” of open disclosure to Musk’s personal opinions. The SEC rules are the rules. There aren’t soft interpretations. A listing requirement is to follow the rules of fair disclosure. Whether Musk was or wasn’t aware is irrelevant – as the CEO of a $50bn company he should know better or at least sought the advice from those that do.

In any event if he was true to the spirit of good corporate governance he would have the good sense to realise his position as CEO has become untenable. How the board can have confidence in him is beyond CM? The multiple senior resignations give an insight but for all of Musk’s instellar cosmic brilliance as a salesman, unfortunately laws are there to provide safety for investors. The shares are offered 13% lower in the aftermarket.

A court will ultimately decide his fate but the $420 a share with secured funding unraveled so quickly as to question his judgement.

Investors, even the die hard believers, don’t need a CEO already under the pump to be distracted anymore than he already is. It is a shame because he is undoubtedly a brilliant mind. Unfortunately that would seemingly make him feel he’s somewhat untouchable leading him to make knee jerk decisions such is what he’s been charged over.

Google’s gaffe only proves the massive opportunity for others

5ADFA0A8-7474-43F0-A432-C467B335FE45.jpeg

The publishing of Google’s internal post-election debrief video shouldn’t surprise anyone in the slightest. All the outer appeals to the group’s impartiality were smashed by this leaked video. In a sense Google was the victim of the half-life nature of the very digital media feeds it seeks to control. Even worse it was all the fromage-grande senior management talking about what really goes on. Sunlight is truly the best disinfectant.

Putting the need to respect the “confidential’ nature of the meeting  (it seems employees aren’t all following those protocols) to one side, this video totally backs up the CM piece which spoke of the opportunity to plug the gaping hole in social media.

We shouldn’t forget what this episode makes blatantly clear – how toxic the work environment must be for staff who don’t share the political views of the politburo.

Mark Zuckerberg openly admitted that Silicon Valley is dominated by the far left. Stands to reason only conservatives get blocked, suspended of banned. Poor old #WalkAway activist Brendan Straka was the latest victim. The articulate openly gay hairdresser was suspended for 30 days for highlighting he’d appear on the recently banned InfoWars. Not posting the video.  Just that he’d appear. Talk about the mixed emotions of the Facebook censor who probably required counseling for having to choose partisan politics over LGBT rights?

None of us need a technical overlord determining what they see as fit for us to consume. If it is Icelandic pig racing in winter or dwarf tossing into a mud pool, should demand for it exist and it is legal then who is Google to censor it outside of respecting government mandated maturity ratings??

If Google had half a brain it would publish the “raw” data of trends. Not its selective manipulated subjective view of what it wants to see but what might be driving populism in Europe or the 2016 Trump election victory? If Google had properly recognized the trends it’d have seen for itself the raw power of understanding motivations rather than cast aspersions and skew feeds to support its own narratives. Truth be told it isn’t working. Every person banned (and the hurdle gets lower every time) highlights the agenda based nature of these social media houses. Search impartiality and no social media house should pop up toward the top of the list.

The beauty of social media is that we are free to choose. Switching costs are effectively free. Yet we use Google because it’s the best search engine and there is little in the way of competing product.

Which stands to reason if a social media proposition with more conservative values which didn’t cut off those who didn’t agree with internal biases was built, the servers would probably crash due to the stampede to join it.

Growing numbers of people have become fed up with what they can’t say (even when completely appropriate) on social media. Not bleedingly obvious profanity and senseless racism but reasoned argument. People are also fed up with learning their data has been used without permission to profile them with ads. In all fairness if one openly publishes his/her/xir data on a social platform then there is an expectation that it’s “at risk”.

Still CM has all “location services” switched off yet a social media service asked to rate a Bavarian beer hall CM visited  the very next day. When a help yourself drinks counter in a reception area of a corporate office provided whiskey the ensuing discussion with a fellow delegate brought up his preferred brand – Johnny Walker Blue. The next day were banner ads on that brand on top of unrelated searches. Presumably the mic is being accessed. Or is it a purely freakish coincidence?!?

The market for free speech is being eroded before our very eyes. The big organizations controlling much of our social media are constantly being outed for their double standards. More consumers are not blind to it yet all the while no real alternative exists the social media giants hold all of the aces.

Therein lies the opportunity.  The demand is there. The day a comparable service is offered without big brother controlled censorship the door will be beaten down. Even if we wish to call the actions of Google et al into question we can choose not to use them at any time.

Let Google, FB and Twitter  treat us as mugs.  Let them exercise their questionable moral value sets on us. The more they do, the more they draw the ire of a growing number of  users. An alternative will come and their behaviour will backfire big time. Live by the sword, die by the sword. CM won’t have the slightest sympathy.

The attitude driven by these divine franchises can be felled very quickly. Bring on the alternative ASAP. Then Google execs will really start crying. #biasbackfire

 

Why not just set up a rival?

1346B271-FF66-4974-838D-70B38A31F0C0.jpeg

Seriously! If conservatives are becoming frustrated at the bias shown by Facebook, Twitter or any other social media forum why not set up a rival? If conservatives feel their voices are being suffocated by political correctness and the actions of arbitrary  thought police why haven’t they set up a platform that will not silence free speech?

Even if they have a very good case to argue against being silenced they have two options; stop using these social media players who they feel obstruct or build a fresh site which would surely see conservatives flock to it.

Fighting Facebook or Twitter to play fair has been proved worthless countless times (e.g. black conservative Candace Owens being suspended for replacing the word “whites” from Sarah Jeong’s tweets with other races). So it is a war that won’t be won.