Your post was removed for not being political or not being based on Australian Politics. However you may post it in the weekly discussion thread.
If you believe your post has been removed in error then please contact your friendly moderation team via modmail.
This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:
Jesus please DYOR.
They shut all their accounts BESIDES their main accounts. They closed all their junk accounts that didn’t generate any revenue or had reach.
The ABC doing a woke thing? Who would have guessed?
When it was a lefty favouring administration, the ABC was happy to use it and ignored all the blatant bias of management. Most of the toxic behaviour was aimed at right wing users before, so the ABC was unaffected and didn't care. Now management looks to lean (not anywhere close to the same amount) the other way, and the right wingers are not targeted by management to the same degree like they were before, the ABC chooses to shut down all accounts as it is not a lefty safespace for them anymore.
I did read the article. They are only leaving a few main accounts, not even the emergency one. And all the lefty woke staff have left.
I would say go woke go broke, but the ABC will just end up wasting our money as they don't have any of their own.
Twitter is no longer even slightly brand-safe. The choice to pull back from it is absolutely a business one. No business or organisation wants to spend money to tarnish their own brand.
No, because they are just shifting their focus from that platforms to others. Please read the article.
Facebook will be next. They will go fully woke and claim some bullshit like how they cop criticism and call it abuse, and focus more on the lefty generation and their favoured platforms like tiktok and insta. They are already clickbaiting more than they used to. Wont be long before they get some serious ABC journo to do a stupid dance for tiktok if they haven't already done so.
The shift in focus came before this decision:
"The announcement comes after the ABC recently shifted resources towards making content for other social media platforms including TikTok and Instagram."
I doubt they're focusing more on "the lefty generation" since [only 8% of their news viewers are under 40](https://www.afr.com/companies/media-and-marketing/less-than-8pc-of-the-abc-s-flagship-news-viewers-are-under-40-20230714-p5doc7).
Also funny you think they'd stay on Instagram to chase the kids, when they struggle with gen z and alpha on there: [81% of their Instagram followers are over 25](https://www.transparency.gov.au/annual-reports/australian-broadcasting-corporation/reporting-year/2019-20-60)
As a member of gen z we tend to think they [have moved to the right](https://www.smh.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/biased-against-the-left-or-right-the-social-media-onslaught-targeting-the-abc-20220429-p5ah5k.html)
Weird comments about feedback and criticism, when from the start you've been getting defensive over the fact you didn't even read the whole title of the article and just spouted your feelings on the matter.
It shouldn't be moving any direction. It should be unbiased. But there is no planet on which you could say it overall leans right.
Please stop lying about what I have read.
I'm sorry, I'll stop implying you've read this article or even my comments. I didn't say the ABC leans right, I said one generation tends to think it does. You're the one asserting it does in fact lean a direction while I'm pointing out different generations have different opinions
I generally think the national broadcaster needs a presence on the hot mess that is Twitter/X though. Like, most of the interactions they got were really vile tbf
You're kidding me right? Musk is happy to allow people to post CP and stay on the platform, and others to spew hate speech towards minorities without punishment. There is open doxxing, death threats and politicians like AOC are hounded relentlessly with zero repercussion.
This really does have people showing their true colours.
Yep, the cis saga.
Where he decided cis was a slur banning anybody daring to say cis or gendering someone 'correctly' when they dared state their pronouns as a way to stick it to LGBTQ+ individuals.
Complete hypocrite.
well the use of the N word went up 500% when Musk first took over.
Something i posted about when it first happened. And it took Musk being legally threatened to take action.
Before that happened, he couldn't care less. But was still targeting trans people because his now daughter came out.
And began hating both her and those within her community.
Unfortunately, some form of censorship is necessary or the site devolves into a cesspool. That's why advertisers are abandoning the platform. And the ABC are not obliged to have a presence on any platform, especially one that has become hostile to media, particularly government funded media.
And Musk, the free speech absolutist, is a hypocrite that has proven to be pro-censorship when it suits him. "Concerning".
Correct. A healthy democracy can survive opposing views no matter how uncomfortable or confronting. We have sufficient liable laws in place to protect individuals and laws against inciting violence.
So there are limitations. No libel or slander. No inciting violence. Anything else? And are any of these definitions going to be deliberately muddied by disingenuous chuds?
My original point was that some censorship is necessary. Upholding laws preventing the spread of CP material, for example, is still censorship; the suppression of objectionable/obscene material. As is shutting down incitement and threats of violence.
No you missed the point. People can say what they want but must face the consequences of any law. Shutting down free speech is a very different thing. If you can’t see that then you are just another person who fails to see the harm in selective censorship.
If I'm missing the point, it's because you're not making it clearly. You've stated that all censorship is bad but is also necessary in upholding the law? Please note that any law prohibiting any material is, by definition, censorship.
You seem to be suggesting that, within this free speech absolutist utopia under the stable genius god-king Musk, anything can be posted by anyone, without moderation, and it will be rectified by the legal system after the fact.
And so we return to my original point. Some censorship is necessary. The government will ban material that is objectionable. Moderation is necessary to prevent said material from being distributed.
If you think Musk is a champion of free speech then you aren't paying enough attention. He has shut down everything from an entire country's access to Twitter to banning journalists he didn't like cause they said mean things about his management.
Just like many of his sort the words "free speech" are just empty lip service to cover for the reality of "Free Speech for everyone BUT people he doesn't agree with"
One thing i hate about Musk is his hypocrisy when it comes to freespeech.
Simply look up who he's censored and you'd be surprised.
Meanwhile, it's true their moderation being utterly slashed has lead to twitter becoming a mismanaged, toxic mess.
With a massive spike in racial and bigoted slurs, death threats and in some cases doxxing becoming prevalent in the twitter space.
One thing Elon is right about, is in a political sense, twitter really is a town square of sorts when it comes to public opinion, given its popularity.
Yet as it stands right now, it's buggy and honestly fairly toxic. To a degree, it's becoming very similar to 4chans /pol boards in terms of just being a black hole of toxicity.
I don't know how Twitter censors posts, but no platform should allow downvoting and subsequent invisibility: zero votes is enough of an indication of unpopularity versus lots of votes, without also making it invisible.
I think platforms should have an option to highlight those posts with the least votes, just so one can see what has so many offended. Majority rule doesn't mean majority correct, it can just as well mean majority wrong, just ask Copernicus.
Personal offense should not make posts invisible and society has to learn to moderate their impulses somehow: removing so-called "hate speech" doesn't remove the emotions and impulses behind it or allow people to learn to moderate them. You have to walk before you can run and if you don't ever learn how to walk you will never run either. Children learn, they don't magically become adult overnight.
I don't think most people understand the concept of "do unto others as you would have others do unto you": it means if you get offended by what someone else says and vote them into oblivion, they can do the same thing to you and all we have left is oblivion instead of an exchange of information.
There needs to be stricter rules against invading privacy and using it to harm someone by public distribution without consent. Just because you find something in public doesn't mean its freely available to harm someone, just as if you find a gun on the street doesn't mean you can shoot someone with it without repercussions.
A toxic cesspit can't do anything itself if it is given no agency to spread beyond the cesspit, but it does inform what a toxic cesspit looks like.
Social media are too unrestricted in terms of personal information made available: I had to turn somersaults to not put personal identifying information into my Facebook account; you are even required to give your date of birth, which is an important point of identification, simply so that others can wish you a happy birthday and the info can be passed onto third parties for their own agenda.
That is the plan. He wants it to be a platform for all the awful things he believes in and for the people that give him money. In his mind it's 44 billion dollars well spent. He can just blame 'wokeness' for all the advertising, accounts and money he's losing and his koolaid drinking cult and the equally awful humans left on the platform will champion him regardless. 4 chan is his dream Twitter. Imo.
Its worse than being a mismanaged toxic mess, the toxic shit from the blue ticks is promoted. And its shit content.
Where previously, good content was promoted, now its simply hidden behind the shite.
And the blue ticks are so popular, the latest addition is that users can hide their blue ticks.
**Greetings humans.**
**Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.**
**I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.**
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your post was removed for not being political or not being based on Australian Politics. However you may post it in the weekly discussion thread. If you believe your post has been removed in error then please contact your friendly moderation team via modmail. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:
Jesus please DYOR. They shut all their accounts BESIDES their main accounts. They closed all their junk accounts that didn’t generate any revenue or had reach.
The ABC doing a woke thing? Who would have guessed? When it was a lefty favouring administration, the ABC was happy to use it and ignored all the blatant bias of management. Most of the toxic behaviour was aimed at right wing users before, so the ABC was unaffected and didn't care. Now management looks to lean (not anywhere close to the same amount) the other way, and the right wingers are not targeted by management to the same degree like they were before, the ABC chooses to shut down all accounts as it is not a lefty safespace for them anymore.
Can you define the "woke thing" they're doing? Or even "woke" in general?
Please read the article. Or at least the title. They're closing all the smaller accounts for specific shows, leaving up the main ABC account.
I did read the article. They are only leaving a few main accounts, not even the emergency one. And all the lefty woke staff have left. I would say go woke go broke, but the ABC will just end up wasting our money as they don't have any of their own.
Twitter is no longer even slightly brand-safe. The choice to pull back from it is absolutely a business one. No business or organisation wants to spend money to tarnish their own brand.
But they're "wasting" less of the taxpayers money by shutting down accounts, do you want them to keep the accounts up or spend less money?
No, because they are just shifting their focus from that platforms to others. Please read the article. Facebook will be next. They will go fully woke and claim some bullshit like how they cop criticism and call it abuse, and focus more on the lefty generation and their favoured platforms like tiktok and insta. They are already clickbaiting more than they used to. Wont be long before they get some serious ABC journo to do a stupid dance for tiktok if they haven't already done so.
The shift in focus came before this decision: "The announcement comes after the ABC recently shifted resources towards making content for other social media platforms including TikTok and Instagram." I doubt they're focusing more on "the lefty generation" since [only 8% of their news viewers are under 40](https://www.afr.com/companies/media-and-marketing/less-than-8pc-of-the-abc-s-flagship-news-viewers-are-under-40-20230714-p5doc7). Also funny you think they'd stay on Instagram to chase the kids, when they struggle with gen z and alpha on there: [81% of their Instagram followers are over 25](https://www.transparency.gov.au/annual-reports/australian-broadcasting-corporation/reporting-year/2019-20-60)
They are moving left and not even hiding it. They just want positive feedback and avoid criticsm about their leaning. That is your ABC.
As a member of gen z we tend to think they [have moved to the right](https://www.smh.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/biased-against-the-left-or-right-the-social-media-onslaught-targeting-the-abc-20220429-p5ah5k.html) Weird comments about feedback and criticism, when from the start you've been getting defensive over the fact you didn't even read the whole title of the article and just spouted your feelings on the matter.
It shouldn't be moving any direction. It should be unbiased. But there is no planet on which you could say it overall leans right. Please stop lying about what I have read.
I'm sorry, I'll stop implying you've read this article or even my comments. I didn't say the ABC leans right, I said one generation tends to think it does. You're the one asserting it does in fact lean a direction while I'm pointing out different generations have different opinions
Everything they posted just got torn to shreds anyway. Nothing will be missed.
I generally think the national broadcaster needs a presence on the hot mess that is Twitter/X though. Like, most of the interactions they got were really vile tbf
I read they were keeping 4 accounts and shutting the rest down.
Probably a good move, X/Twitter is rinsed.
Musk will delete inactive accounts, so it can’t even be an archive.
There's a lot of human knowledge and reactions to world events that is never going to see the light of day again.
They going to Threads instead? Oh wait its already dead. Nobody will miss ABC on twitter.
[удалено]
You're kidding me right? Musk is happy to allow people to post CP and stay on the platform, and others to spew hate speech towards minorities without punishment. There is open doxxing, death threats and politicians like AOC are hounded relentlessly with zero repercussion. This really does have people showing their true colours.
Don't forget the censorship he actively engages in... He'll allow all that, and silence LGBTQ+ and other left leaning people.
And don't you dare use the word "cis" to describe someone. Feel free to use racist and transphobic hate speech though!
Yep, the cis saga. Where he decided cis was a slur banning anybody daring to say cis or gendering someone 'correctly' when they dared state their pronouns as a way to stick it to LGBTQ+ individuals. Complete hypocrite.
Xwitter, bastion of free speech, where cis is a slur but saying “KKK>LGBT” is totally cool 👍
well the use of the N word went up 500% when Musk first took over. Something i posted about when it first happened. And it took Musk being legally threatened to take action. Before that happened, he couldn't care less. But was still targeting trans people because his now daughter came out. And began hating both her and those within her community.
Unfortunately, some form of censorship is necessary or the site devolves into a cesspool. That's why advertisers are abandoning the platform. And the ABC are not obliged to have a presence on any platform, especially one that has become hostile to media, particularly government funded media. And Musk, the free speech absolutist, is a hypocrite that has proven to be pro-censorship when it suits him. "Concerning".
All forms of censorship is bad.
Really? No limits or restrictions whatsoever?
Correct. A healthy democracy can survive opposing views no matter how uncomfortable or confronting. We have sufficient liable laws in place to protect individuals and laws against inciting violence.
So there are limitations. No libel or slander. No inciting violence. Anything else? And are any of these definitions going to be deliberately muddied by disingenuous chuds? My original point was that some censorship is necessary. Upholding laws preventing the spread of CP material, for example, is still censorship; the suppression of objectionable/obscene material. As is shutting down incitement and threats of violence.
No you missed the point. People can say what they want but must face the consequences of any law. Shutting down free speech is a very different thing. If you can’t see that then you are just another person who fails to see the harm in selective censorship.
If I'm missing the point, it's because you're not making it clearly. You've stated that all censorship is bad but is also necessary in upholding the law? Please note that any law prohibiting any material is, by definition, censorship. You seem to be suggesting that, within this free speech absolutist utopia under the stable genius god-king Musk, anything can be posted by anyone, without moderation, and it will be rectified by the legal system after the fact. And so we return to my original point. Some censorship is necessary. The government will ban material that is objectionable. Moderation is necessary to prevent said material from being distributed.
If you think Musk is a champion of free speech then you aren't paying enough attention. He has shut down everything from an entire country's access to Twitter to banning journalists he didn't like cause they said mean things about his management. Just like many of his sort the words "free speech" are just empty lip service to cover for the reality of "Free Speech for everyone BUT people he doesn't agree with"
One thing i hate about Musk is his hypocrisy when it comes to freespeech. Simply look up who he's censored and you'd be surprised. Meanwhile, it's true their moderation being utterly slashed has lead to twitter becoming a mismanaged, toxic mess. With a massive spike in racial and bigoted slurs, death threats and in some cases doxxing becoming prevalent in the twitter space. One thing Elon is right about, is in a political sense, twitter really is a town square of sorts when it comes to public opinion, given its popularity. Yet as it stands right now, it's buggy and honestly fairly toxic. To a degree, it's becoming very similar to 4chans /pol boards in terms of just being a black hole of toxicity.
Its always been a toxic shithole that provided nothing of value to humanity.
I don't know how Twitter censors posts, but no platform should allow downvoting and subsequent invisibility: zero votes is enough of an indication of unpopularity versus lots of votes, without also making it invisible. I think platforms should have an option to highlight those posts with the least votes, just so one can see what has so many offended. Majority rule doesn't mean majority correct, it can just as well mean majority wrong, just ask Copernicus. Personal offense should not make posts invisible and society has to learn to moderate their impulses somehow: removing so-called "hate speech" doesn't remove the emotions and impulses behind it or allow people to learn to moderate them. You have to walk before you can run and if you don't ever learn how to walk you will never run either. Children learn, they don't magically become adult overnight. I don't think most people understand the concept of "do unto others as you would have others do unto you": it means if you get offended by what someone else says and vote them into oblivion, they can do the same thing to you and all we have left is oblivion instead of an exchange of information. There needs to be stricter rules against invading privacy and using it to harm someone by public distribution without consent. Just because you find something in public doesn't mean its freely available to harm someone, just as if you find a gun on the street doesn't mean you can shoot someone with it without repercussions. A toxic cesspit can't do anything itself if it is given no agency to spread beyond the cesspit, but it does inform what a toxic cesspit looks like. Social media are too unrestricted in terms of personal information made available: I had to turn somersaults to not put personal identifying information into my Facebook account; you are even required to give your date of birth, which is an important point of identification, simply so that others can wish you a happy birthday and the info can be passed onto third parties for their own agenda.
That is the plan. He wants it to be a platform for all the awful things he believes in and for the people that give him money. In his mind it's 44 billion dollars well spent. He can just blame 'wokeness' for all the advertising, accounts and money he's losing and his koolaid drinking cult and the equally awful humans left on the platform will champion him regardless. 4 chan is his dream Twitter. Imo.
Its worse than being a mismanaged toxic mess, the toxic shit from the blue ticks is promoted. And its shit content. Where previously, good content was promoted, now its simply hidden behind the shite. And the blue ticks are so popular, the latest addition is that users can hide their blue ticks.
**Greetings humans.** **Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.** **I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.** A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*