He claims that paying helps eliminate bots, there's no way he truly believes that or he is dumber than given credit for. The entities that are interested in disinformation have deep pockets.
So a large amount of dipshits who're are stupid or vicious enough to pay for blue, digital checkmarks are largely posting false content that is believed by other dipshits who get their knowledge just by a degenerated social media platform like twitter?
The moment it became paid to be official was the moment spammers and worse thought they would become recognised as trustworthy. Nowadays if it's blue dont believe anything they say.
So a large amount of dipshits who're are stupid or vicious enough to pay for blue, digital checkmarks are largely posting false content that is believed by other dipshits who get their knowledge just by a degenerated social media platform like twitter?
If i had to guess, habit.
If someone's used to doing something everyday they're gonna trend towards repeating what's already engrained into their routine because the familiar shit-show is still more comfortable than the unfamiliar but more enjoyable platforms/habits, whatever they may be
It doesn't matter how good the new platforms are if the people you follow aren't there. I do all my posting on Mastodon now but when it comes to people I follow on Twitter virtually none of them have moved their stuff over so I run out of interesting things to check out quickly
People here are just gonna tell you to leave (I have done so myself) but if you can't for whatever reason something that can help is an extension like Blue Blocker which automatically blocks (or you can set it to mute) blue check marks as you encounter them. That way you don't give them money for their horrible baits. While I was at Twitter waiting until the people I followed shared their new socials (sadly most went to BlueSky instead of Mastodon so I lost them anyway) I used Blue Blocker in that manner. You can set exceptions for certain accounts tho I didn't, it mercilessly nuked all checkmarks from my Fred and reveales the bare Twitter behind. The result was somewhat like old Twitter at first but eventually it does get kinda slow as most of the valuable accounts become inactive. On the bright side that made leaving so much easier, so if you want to leave but need a motivator there's one that might help you.
People here are just gonna tell you to leave (I have done so myself) but if you can't for whatever reason something that can help is an extension like Blue Blocker which automatically blocks (or you can set it to mute) blue check marks as you encounter them. That way you don't give them money for their horrible baits. While I was at Twitter waiting until the people I followed shared their new socials (sadly most went to BlueSky instead of Mastodon so I lost them anyway) I used Blue Blocker in that manner. You can set exceptions for certain accounts tho I didn't, it mercilessly muted all checkmarks from my feed and revealed the bare Twitter behind. The result was somewhat like old Twitter at first but eventually it does get kinda slow as most of the valuable accounts become inactive. On the bright side that made leaving so much easier, so if you want to leave but need a motivator there's one that might help you.
Yep, sounds like Elon and the Saudi's have achieved their goal of crippling Twitter's utility as a means of organizing large scale protests and uprisings like the Arab Spring or the BLM protests in 2020. Now all that's left are propaganda bots and various flavours of right wing extremists.
I didn't say there weren't alternatives. I said Elon and the Saudi's achieved their goal of crippling the biggest. I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, eh?
Demand USA lawmakers make a fairness doctrine for media and social media. We used to have a fairness doctrine. Tweak it though.
The fairness doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented. The demise of this FCC rule has been cited as a contributing factor in the rising level of party polarization in the United States.[5][6]
I mean this is already unsurprising given how easy it was to get a blue checkmark as a journalist back when it was Twitter.
Literally any media corporation could get it for any of their employees. But for anyone else, you had to pay thousands to get a middleman who had a contact at twitter to verify you. It was such a weird system.
About everyone (including several news sites) have produced false/misleading claims about who launched which rocket and how many were killed and all the other stuff, because this fight is messy, and both sides want to look good.
How many of those misinformers just copied from another source that's supposed to be more trusted?
This definitely feels le sampling bias to me. What percentage of xhitter as a whole is paying for blue checks? What percentage of information regarding the war from blue checks is true? How does that compare with the same figure for non paying customers?