• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 months ago

    For those who don’t want to read the whole thing, this is the hilariously bad argument Twitter is making:

    X is trying to argue that the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) violated the site’s terms of service and illegally accessed non-public data to conduct its reporting, allegedly posing a security risk for X. The boycott, X alleged, cost the company tens of millions of dollars by spooking advertisers, while X contends that the CCDH’s reporting is misleading and ads are rarely served on extremist content.

  • Baggins [he/him]@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    So their argument is that it was forseeable that allowing hate speech on the platform would cause financial losses??? Then why the fuck did they do it?