Summary
French prosecutors have launched an investigation into Elon Musk’s X over allegations that it manipulated its algorithms to distort discourse.
The probe follows a report from a French lawmaker, citing “biased algorithms” that may have interfered with automated data processing.
Meanwhile, the EU is also investigating X for potential violations of the Digital Services Act, demanding internal algorithm documents by Feb. 15.
X has faced criticism for allegedly amplifying far-right content, with Musk publicly supporting Germany’s far-right AfD party.
X has been accused of manipulating its systems to give far-right posts and politicians greater visibility over other political groups.
Before Elon bought Twitter, the system did the exact same thing, but with left-leaning posts. Back then, the French prosecutors didn’t seem to care. Now that the political tide is changing, they suddenly care?
Twitter 1.0 outright banned right-leaning users. Silencing dissenting voices from online political discourse isn’t considered “gaming the system”?
Does anyone remember when Twitter 1.0 censored stories about the Hunter Biden Laptop? On my book, that’s manipulation.
The problem was when lefties were in charge of Twitter’s moderation team. They were trigger-happy in banning anyone who didn’t agree with their self-proclaimed “social consensus.” In this last U.S. election cycle, we found out this consensus was a lie. Examples:
User1: “I’m against illegal immigration. Deport the illegals now!”
Mod: “Racist!! You’re permanently banned!”
User2: “We gotta have stricter laws for legal refugees. They don’t respect our local customs and bring social issues (i.e., higher crime rates) that burden the taxpayer.”
Mod: “Nazi!! You’re permanently banned!”
User3: “I’m against hormonal therapies and sex-change surgeries on kids. We gotta have legislation that forbids it and makes doctors accountable.”
Mod: “Transphobe!! You’re permanently banned!”
They maliciously extrapolate dissenting opinions to paint them as something bad. People have the right to be dissatisfied with current policies and advocate for change. That shouldn’t be a bannable offense.
You need to have imaginary conversations with yourself to try to pretend you’re not full of shit. What a bozo.
I’m waiting for your counter-arguments. Or is ad hominem the only thing you know?
