DesiNew – Daily Breaking News and Updates

Donald Trump: US President Trump threatens fact-checking on Twitter; What will happen next? | world News

Let’s Start this Interesting Article Shared on

Oakland, California: Twitter has taken the unprecedented step of adding fact-check warnings to two tweets of President Donald Trump, who called the mail-in ballots “sufficiently fraudulent” and predicted a “rigorous election”. On Wednesday, the president threatened to impose new regulation on social media companies or even to “shut them down”.
But Twitter’s move and Trump’s response have led to many questions, including why Twitter now takes action, how it decides when to use such warnings, and its new role for the 2020 US presidential election. What do you mean
Question: Twitter has for years opposed taking action on Trump’s tweets, despite the president’s history of spreading misinformation and misuse on the platform. Did change
answer: Trump has pushed the boundaries of Twitter for years, using it to attack rivals, talk to his base, and simply vent. As of Tuesday, he never faced sanctions – though other world leaders had.
But things began to change earlier this year when coronavirus misinformation began to spread. Twitter began flagging tweets that spread disputed or misleading claims about the virus, “getting the facts” for more information, including news and fact-checking.
Twitter said that it is adding warnings to other tweets that may confuse users. Tweets deemed “harmful” will be removed completely. Trump’s vote-by-mail tweets were previously non-epidemic, with Twitter flagging as such.
Those tweets had specific Twitter criteria for misinformation on certain topics, including coronoviruses, voting in elections, and the census. There is no such policy for other subjects. Earlier Trump tweeted about Joe Scarborough, who baselessly suggested the television host and was murdered by former GOP congressmen 20 years ago, did not fall under a specific misinformation category that left them untouched Not anymore.
Syracuse University communications professor Jennifer Grigel said that Twitter’s action is “a symbolic public outrage, in which the company seems to have to take action.” “It’s a sign that Twitter fears more public opinion than the president, who cries wolves often,” he said.
Question: Can Trump also make good on his threats to regulate or shut down social media companies? Could Congress or the Federal Communications Commission help him do this?
answer: It is highly unlikely.
Yale University law professor and First Amendment expert Jack Balkin said any effort to regulate social media companies for the content on their site would require congressional input and approval – and certainly strong legal challenges. Will have to face it. Meanwhile, the FCC has no jurisdiction over Internet companies such as Twitter.
It is clear, the Balkans said, that Trump’s limit of authority is to enforce his own rules. Although the President may ask for an inquiry or issue some sort of executive order, he cannot repeal the laws written by Congress and enshrined in the Constitution. But that’s not the point, he said.
“This is an effort by the president, as we used to say in basketball, referees work,” Balkan said. “He is threatening and is Kajoling with the idea that these people in his corporate board room will think twice what they are doing.”
Former federal judge Michael McConnell, who now directs the Stanford Law School’s Constitutional Law Center, also said Trump lacked the legal power to support his threat. “They have no such authority,” he said in an email. “He’s just venting.”
Question: Trump on Tuesday made the same claims about mail-in ballots on Facebook, but the company took no action. Has Twitter’s decision increased bets for other social media companies?
answer: Not for Facebook, it’s not.
CEO Mark Zuckerberg said Wednesday that tech companies should not be in the business of separating fact from their platforms.
Zuckerberg said in a Fox News interview aired on Wednesday, “We have a different policy than Twitter, I think I firmly believe that Facebook should not be true to everything that people Says online. ” “In general, private companies – these platform companies in particular – should not be in a position to do so.”
Facebook has long opposed outright investigative politicians, including the ads they run on their sites. The company has a policy against voter intervention that includes, among other things, misrepresenting “dates, locations, times and ways to vote”, but has not implemented these rules in Trump’s office.
And Facebook, which works with news outlets on its site, including claims from The Associated Press to Fact Check, does not allow Facebook posts by Trump or other politicians to be directly linked.
However, similar policies regarding voting misinformation are shared on Facebook and Twitter, including bans around posts on how or where to vote. Also, Facebook reduces the circulation of social media posts, if they are incorrectly rated by dozens of news outlets, they actually investigate claims on their site.
Question: How does Twitter decide which tweets are marked with warnings? What happens tweet?
answer: Trump’s tweet went green after someone reported it. This can happen to anyone, but Twitter insists that it cannot police every tweet. The company makes its decision on the matter unlike Facebook, which outsources such work to outside fact-checkers.
Twitter said that tweets that were tweeted in this way were not demoted, hidden, or “silenced” in any way.
Lisa Fazio, professor of psychology and misinformation expert at Vanderbilt University, said the fact-checking link is “problematic” because it does not directly dispute misinformation in tweets. On her own, she said, “‘get the facts’ may mean the president is right, and there is evidence here. Revenge is very weak.”
Question: What does this mean for the 2020 US presidential election?
answer: Twitter says that users can expect to see more such flags on misleading tweets about voting.
Grygiel said whether or not Twitter sticks with the practice, how much pressure the public and the media are under. It is also unclear how effective it will be.
“Some research has shown that labeling can cause some people to dig more and oppose it,” Griziel said.


Exit mobile version