Birdwatch is designed to add context with which both extremes agree. The quoted watches are reasoned, and cite sources. Actually more informative than 99% of Twitter.
The change seems to be that it has now rolled out on all accounts rather than just Red accounts, and now there is drama.
> The change seems to be that it has now rolled out on all accounts rather than just Red accounts, and now there is drama.
What do you mean by this? There was one high profile incident with the white house, but I am struggling to believe that’s when the controversy started.
> All we know for sure is last week there were notable embarrassing contextualizations of right-wing propaganda, and no notable embarrassing contextualizations of left-wing propaganda. Now, there are many examples.
I was citing the highest profile, very recent incident. The one that got greater attention. I’m sure there have been other times Democrats have made statements that have been fact checked and found false, which is a good thing to do.
Still not sure where you’re getting this idea that there is suddenly an outcry because people across the aisle are just now being fact checked. Do you have any data on how often it was only Republicans vs. Democrats and how that shifted? Do you have any data on whether or not there’s been an uptick in bad information posted by Democrats? I just think you’re missing a lot of critical context here and your inferences are not really earned.
The change seems to be that it has now rolled out on all accounts rather than just Red accounts, and now there is drama.