TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The Social Media Thread

Go To

By "social media" we mean any large computer network that allows people to interact in shared communities. The big ones of course are Facebook, Twitter (X), and Instagram, but we can't forget newer platforms like Discord and Slack.

Dedicated video sites are off-topic here and YouTube has its own separate thread.

What we should discuss in this OTC topic are news items, business operations, and activities by the networks themselves, not specific things posted by users. Those should go into threads appropriate to the subjects of those posts. For example, if an actor tweets about a film, we'd discuss that in the Media forum topic for the film, not here. If Facebook changes its policies, that could be discussed here.

The politics, motives, competency and wider business activities of the owners and leaders of social media companies (e.g. Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg) are also off-topic — except in situations where they are directly making specific policy for the platform.

Talking about a particular Instagram policy change (or a high-profile ban on a specific user) directly announced by Mark Zuckerberg would be acceptable in this thread, speculating about Zuckerberg's wider motivations wouldn't be.

One exception is Truth Social, due to its connection to Donald Trump. As there is a forum ban on US Politics, all discussion of Truth Social is off-topic and posts about the platform may be thumped.

The thread's also not about "dumb thing [public figure] said on [social media platform]". If there isn't a specific thread related to the subject of the statement, then it's probably gossip and not worth talking about.


     Thread OP 
So, I was looking for a dedicated social media thread and apparently there was this one created back in 2020 that we never opened. Unfortunately, it's a little stale, so bumping it isn't going to work very well, but I would like to restart it. The reason I'm doing so is that the Computer Thread seems to have become the de facto place for this sort of talk, and it's a big tonal clash with talking about computer tech.

The hot topic of the day is Elon Musk's bid to acquire Twitter. We first discussed it in the Computer Thread, starting roughly here, and I am not going to rehash the entire discussion. Instead, I am going to resume from the last post:

CNBC: Twitter is reportedly taking another look at Musk takeover bid

Twitter's board is reportedly meeting with Elon Musk and may seek to negotiate on his buyout offer. Musk claims to have secured $46 billion in funding to buy the company at a valuation of $43 billion and is preparing to make a tender offer to its shareholders.

While the board has passed a poison pill, it could be facing resistance to that from groups of shareholders and will want to talk things out rather than face a hostile takeover. It's also possible that Twitter's stock could crash if the offer fails to go through.


Another possible topic was originally posted here.

Ars Technica: EU to unveil landmark law to force Big Tech to police illegal content

Following on from the recently passed Digital Markets Act, which requires large tech companies to unbundle first-party software from hardware platforms, the proposed Digital Services Act will require medium and large social media platforms and search engines to police hate speech and disinformation while adding additional protections for children against targeted marketing.

It also bans "dark patterns", which manipulate or trick people into clicking on ads or other content. The article doesn't explicitly say what that means, but I assume it includes things like disguising ads to look like parts of a site's user interface, hiding "close" buttons, and such.

For large companies, the requirements would go into effect immediately. For medium companies, they would have a grace period to implement the changes.

Thierry Breton, the EU’s internal market commissioner, has warned that Big Tech has become “too big to care.”

This phrase, "too big to care", intrigues me. It's an indictment of the idea that these companies have decided that growth and engagement metrics overwhelm any sense of social responsibility.

In my opinion, a law like this would be impossible in the United States, since it would be challenged (likely successfully) on First Amendment grounds.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 8th 2024 at 5:16:31 PM

Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9476: Apr 25th 2023 at 1:36:25 PM

Twitter verified fake Disney account, claims dead celebs subscribe to Twitter Blue: Living celebs want everyone to know they didn't pay Elon for those checkmarks.

The fake "Disney Junior UK" account got the gold checkmark despite having barely more than 1,000 followers, an Internet Archive capture shows. It gained a few thousand more followers before being suspended.

Applying checkmarks to notable accounts isn't so different from the pre-Musk system. But a big difference now is the message attached to the checkmark suggests that the account holder paid for the badge and verified their identities.

It sounds like Twitter was always handing out these checkmarks regardless of whether someone wanted them, it's just that they now come with a claim of payment.

Many people on Twitter have claimed over the past couple of days that Twitter violated US law by implying that celebrities intentionally subscribed to Twitter Blue. But Northeastern University law professor Alexandra Roberts, an expert on the laws around false advertising, wrote in a long thread that there isn't a clear answer on whether it's a violation.

Here is the thread from the law prof.

The main question seems to be whether or not the checkmark text making a claim of payment constitutes an ad/promotion, which the courts seem to be unclear on.

Edited by Redmess on Apr 25th 2023 at 10:50:00 AM

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#9477: Apr 26th 2023 at 3:30:47 AM

Child kidnapped by predator who groomed him over Twitter/Discord Police unable to get relevant from Twitter despite warrant. Given the subject matter I'll do my best to summarise. The child (who has been returned safe to his parents) was groomed by a man over a number of social media platforms, including Twitter. The parents did find out and notified police who were able to identify that there was grooming based off the stuff publicly on Twitter, but they weren't able to get a prompt response from Twitter to get the groomers details and as a result the boy was kidnapped. This happened right after Musk culled the number of employees at Twitter, and while the police initially submitted the wrong user name when they submitted the right name they heard nothing from Twitter at all for days leading up to the kidnapping.

Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9478: Apr 26th 2023 at 3:36:31 AM

Well, they did get some response... a poop emoji.

This is the sort of shit you get when you don't have a proper PR department or anything outward facing.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#9479: Apr 26th 2023 at 3:48:29 AM

I vaguely recall people predicting stuff like this would happen after Musk's buyout and mass firings. People also raised the risk of the Verification system getting gutted leading to an uptick of this stuff.

It's not am easy job at the best of times, and while I doubt Twitter will suffer any repercussions from this case I do morally lay this squarely on Musk's shoulders for the lack of timely response.

JethroQWalrustitty Since: Jan, 2001
#9480: Apr 26th 2023 at 3:53:21 AM

Yeah, I remember when the layoffs happened, and the fanatical Musk people kept repeating some nebulous number of "accounts deleted" as proof of how much more serious Musk takes this than the previous administration.

Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9481: Apr 26th 2023 at 3:59:59 AM

It's not a crime to run your business poorly, though he will surely annoy investigators.

Probably the biggest legal risk would be failing to comply with court orders in a timely fashion.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
RedHunter543 Crimson Paladin Since: Jul, 2016 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Crimson Paladin
#9482: Apr 26th 2023 at 4:24:23 AM

The only crime Musk could get in trouble for is pissing off other rich people.

So his running of Twitter is bound to step on toes of his investors.

Edited by RedHunter543 on Apr 26th 2023 at 7:25:09 PM

"The Black Rage makes us strong, because we must resist its temptations every day of our lives or be forever damned!"
Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9483: Apr 26th 2023 at 4:39:51 AM

He can absolutely get in trouble for other crimes.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#9484: Apr 26th 2023 at 4:47:44 AM

Per Zoe Schiffer of Platformer, Elon Musk stole the Twitter handle @e from its owner who for years and through hacking attempts has refused every offer to give the account up. While it is largely just an ego thing from Musk (who has turned the account into one of his alts) and as owner of Twitter is something that sounds like its within his power to do, I do wonder what the legal implications are over this. The account had a value to it as people have been making offers to buy the account for years, and from past behaviour the owner had no interest in ever selling it. To my knowledge there is no policy on Twitter taking back an account, he hasn't (to the best of my knowledge) broken any other policies, does he have any recourse for what is theft in everything but law?

Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9485: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:01:18 AM

I think we need a little more context. Was it an actual account in use, or was it basically domain squatting?

If it was the latter, I'd say Musk has every right to take the account handle back. Domain squatting is a shady practice and should not be encouraged.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#9486: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:11:24 AM

Gizmodo article on the account stealing. It looks like the original was squatting on the account but had dealt with hacking in the past. The value of the account could have been $50,000 back in 2014 based off other one letter accounts.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#9487: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:14:43 AM

The article also points out that Musk reportedly wants to sell high-value usernames like that.

Musk’s Twitter has considered selling high-value usernames in recent months in an attempt to make money, the New York Times reported in January, although plans to do so haven’t been enacted yet. In December, the Twitter CEO said he wanted to delete inactive accounts to free up 1.5 billion usernames.

And yeah, another person who had a one-letter account had to deal with extortion before getting it back.

Back in 2014, Naoki Hiroshima published an op-ed in Gizmodo where he said he had been offered $50,000 for his username, @N, and was extorted into giving it up. As of today, Hiroshima appears to have regained control of the handle.

Edited by M84 on Apr 26th 2023 at 8:16:31 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#9488: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:21:15 AM

I actually read that article back in 2014, Twitter had apparently fucked up and helped the extorted gain access to the owner's email account IIRC.

If Musk plans on selling these accounts and is stealing them from the original owner's that's super shitty. It feels like it should be illegal but I don't think that it is.

Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9489: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:28:40 AM

As the owner of Twitter, he probably has the right to do so. And since these people are basically squatting on accounts just to sell them for extortionate prices, I don't feel particularly sorry for them, either.

Honestly, if it were me, I'd just ban all such "special" account names altogether.

Edited by Redmess on Apr 26th 2023 at 2:29:42 PM

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#9490: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:29:18 AM

They're not selling them!! They have to put up with being extorted and hacked for their accounts! And that was before Musk decided he can just steal them.

Edited by M84 on Apr 26th 2023 at 8:30:02 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
Resileafs I actually wanted to be Resileaf Since: Jan, 2019
I actually wanted to be Resileaf
#9491: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:30:25 AM

Imagine defending a bilionnaire for stealing a username so he can sell them.

Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9492: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:30:39 AM

Then why are they sitting on these accounts? What do they use them for?

[up] I'm not defending him, I'm just saying that it is within his right to do so.

Edited by Redmess on Apr 26th 2023 at 2:31:28 PM

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#9493: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:34:15 AM

They're not selling them. These account owners got the accounts legitimately and have kept them for their own reasons. They've been offered money for the accounts but haven't because they're not interested. And this is perfectly within their right to do so. If they used these accounts just to follow other accounts and never tweet that's a legitimate use of the account.

So Musk stealing the accounts to sell them is a shitty thing to do. Legally he's probably within his rights to do so, but he is stealing them from people who use them legitimately to make money for himself. He isn't even in the same ballpark as being in the right.

[up]Imagine if someone created a TV Tropes account so they could follow specific threads. Following your logic they weren't using those accounts.

Edited by Shaoken on Apr 26th 2023 at 10:35:31 PM

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#9494: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:35:22 AM

It's completely morally indefensible and disgusting, but that's not the same thing as outright illegal of course. But yeah, we really shouldn't be defending this.

Edited by M84 on Apr 26th 2023 at 8:35:54 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9495: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:37:24 AM

[up], [up][up] Agreed, that makes more sense.

Though if these accounts are such a magnet for hacking and extortion, maybe their owners should be glad to be rid of them.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#9496: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:39:19 AM

I'm not sure if it should be illegal in this circumstances. If these accounts were making content and he stole and some them to capitalise on that work then absolutely that should be illegal. But in this circumstance despite the accounts having a tangible value its not from anything the owners put into the account.

But blaming the account owners is wrong. It's their accounts and they should be allowed to use them and keep them.

Edited by Shaoken on Apr 26th 2023 at 10:40:12 PM

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#9497: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:40:46 AM

Blaming people for being the target of theft and extortion attempts because they have something others want is victim blaming.

Edited by M84 on Apr 26th 2023 at 8:41:50 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#9498: Apr 26th 2023 at 5:43:46 AM

To put it more clearly, a social media site has the right to disallow the use of certain user names, and to reserve them for their own use.

For example, a social media site could forbid the use of "admin" as a user name (for obvious reasons), and then reserve that user name for its own use.

[up] I'm not blaming the users at all. But having such a high profile "special" user name does paint a target on your back.

Edited by Redmess on Apr 26th 2023 at 2:45:04 PM

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#9499: Apr 26th 2023 at 6:18:54 AM

Child kidnapped by predator who groomed him over Twitter/Discord Police unable to get relevant from Twitter despite warrant.

Aint there legal consequences to ignoring a warrant.

Resileafs I actually wanted to be Resileaf Since: Jan, 2019
I actually wanted to be Resileaf
#9500: Apr 26th 2023 at 6:23:24 AM

I'm not blaming the users at all. But having such a high profile "special" user name does paint a target on your back.

That's the logic used to blame women who go out late at night for getting harassed.

Also it's a letter. It's not special, it's a single letter.

Edited by Resileafs on Apr 26th 2023 at 10:27:15 AM


Total posts: 18,668
Top