QUOTE(dragontamer8740 @ Nov 30 2021, 12:08)

link?
[
www.washingtonpost.com]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/202...y-policy-media/[
techcrunch.com]
https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/30/twitter-e...-their-consent/[
www.fastcompany.com]
https://www.fastcompany.com/90701453/people...tweeting-imagesQUOTE
The misuse of private media can affect everyone, but can have a disproportionate effect on women, activists, dissidents, and members of minority communities.
Sharing factual videos and images disproportionately affects radical Marxists. There is no point if we can infinitely bail out radicals if their images are posted online. It also makes propaganda less effective if people can see the actual videos or photos.
Oh the policy also allows activist groups to apply to remove images and not just the individual. That's handy. You also don't have to prove you are the person in the photo to apply. Gosh that's useful.
If blue checks decide the image being posted is 'useful for public discourse' then the images can remain on twitter. That's great for propaganda.
So far the policy has some pretty big holes already:
Photos and videos of Jan 6 participants; useful for public discourse fighting racism somehow.
Photos and videos of 'peaceful protests' to be removed for impacting on the protected right to free speech.
The radicals are actually worried that the policy will be used to remove videos of police brutality and prevent them from going viral which is a major source of their funding and engagement. So they want a commitment from twitter that the policy will be applied 'correctly'.
It would be kind of hilarious if Twitter actually enforced their policy in a non-partisan fashion and started stopping the platform from polarizing the planet but that would just be a pipe dream.
This post has been edited by EsotericSatire: Dec 1 2021, 01:26