Matt Taibbi

Rank 23 of 47
|
Score 29
6/15/2024, 9:54:02 PM
X
In reply to:
Kael
@KaelFischer
·
599d
@mgkkain @LordDSofCanada @mtaibbi You are correct, and that is also what BGJ is saying in the post. She calls that part you quoted an "overly broad claim." It's unfortunate that BJG's post could be misread to say that TF made that claim. The main COVID TF, by David Zweig (not Matt):
David Zweig
@davidzweig
·
1136d
1. THREAD:

THE TWITTER FILES: HOW TWITTER RIGGED THE COVID DEBATE

– By censoring info that was true but inconvenient to U.S. govt. policy
– By discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed
– By suppressing ordinary users, including some sharing the CDC’s *own data*
David Forrester
@mgkkain
·
599d
@KaelFischer @LordDSofCanada @mtaibbi "*pro-vax* misinformation from libs targeting conservative-leaning skeptics should’ve been avoided"

This is false Because the skeptics ran the range of the political spectrum. I saw left right and center get censored for opposing the goverment position on shit.
Kael
@KaelFischer
·
599d
@LordDSofCanada @mtaibbi What was the lie, in that post. She seems cagey and throws shade generally around, but I didn't notice the lie.
Lord DS
@LordDSofCanada
·
599d
@KaelFischer @mtaibbi It's not about conflict. It's just that once again, BJG is blatantly lying and calling it a fact.
Kael
@KaelFischer
·
599d
@mtaibbi I don't think there is any conflict between what BJG said in her tweet and what you posted from that FOIA re: Virality project. 🤷
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
599d
The documents I got - not from Elon, not from the Twitter Files, but from FOIA requests filed as part of the hard work that a reporter does -showed the Virality Project deemed disinfo any post that was "encouraging people to partake in a VACCINE or remedy that has not received…

The statement engages in a substantive discussion about the interpretation of information related to the 'Twitter Files' and government influence on narratives, particularly in the context of COVID-19. The tone is corrective and aims to clarify misunderstandings in the ongoing conversation.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement strives to clarify a misunderstanding, which can be seen as an attempt to do no harm by ensuring accurate information is shared. This aligns well with the principle. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by focusing on the content of the discussion rather than attacking individuals. This aligns well with the principle. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By aiming to clarify and correct a misunderstanding, the statement promotes understanding and empathy. This aligns well with the principle. [+1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by addressing the content of the discussion rather than making personal attacks. This aligns well with the principle. [+1]