this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2025
1325 points (98.9% liked)
People Twitter
7487 readers
823 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As a politician trying to reach members of the public, including those who could possibly be swayed by you, the last thing you want to do is entirely remove yourself from a platform with a very large reach.
Wanting people to leave Twitter is all well and good, but you can't discount the fact that so many people are still on there, and refuse to spend the time setting up new profiles on entirely different sites with smaller userbases. For politicians, reach is key, and Twitter still has the users.
You guys are mostly being civil, but I'm giving you guys a strong reminder to hate the argument but don't shit on the user. Warning.
I appreciate your comment but largely disagrees. Communicating on a platform you don't own and can't control seems very shortsighted. She should publish on her (or her party's infrastructure) first and a bot is largely sufficient for Twitter.
I feel like this would be a much more realistic take if social media more broadly was all federated, and anyone's independent instance could still communicate with the others, but that's unfortunately not the case.
For a politician, which is better for their campaign? Starting an independent platform they entirely own and control, but with no local users to start out with, or having an account on an existing platform with millions and millions of users?
Obviously, even though in the first example they would have 100% control over their infrastructure, they wouldn't exactly be spreading their message very far. They could always publish simultaneously on both platforms, but that still doesn't mean much if the second platform has no users. However, the platform that has many millions of users can instantly grant them reach, which is kind of the point of them being on social media in the first place.
On your point about a bot, I'm assuming you mean more like a bridge mechanism that cross-posts from one platform to another. You could correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe AOC at least posts a lot of similar messaging on both Twitter and Bluesky, rather than staying isolated to one or the other. It's not exactly the same thing, but it has a similar effect.
In an ideal world, everyone could easily host their own Mastodon server and just communicate with others without being tied to a platform, but unfortunately we still live in a world where the network effect is keeping people trapped in corporate social media silos, and there's only so much an individual politician can do to change that without harming their own ability to message to the public.
I kinda agree with you. By bot I meant not only the technical posting of an identical message from one platform to another but also communicating that one is the official channel where answers will be read and replied to. The other is just a read-only pasted version.
There is no point in arguing over Twitter.
Back when Playboy was "the men's magazine you read for the articles," they always had an extensive interview with a major public figure. Often it would be someone with a moral component to their careers, like religious figures or politicians, and they would be criticized for lending their credibility to what many felt was pornography.
Inevitably, every one justified it by saying, "If you want to reach the sinners, you can't wait for them to come to you, you have to go to them."
Hugh Hefner was a suspected rapist at the time, but Elon is a confirmed Nazi right now.
They shouldn't have been using it at all for official government posts
they need to establish on bluesky while it still fresh.
Nobody left on that platform is going to be convinced of anything anymore. If being bought by a literal Nazi saluting is not enough to change their minds, nothing she can say will sway the right wingers and bots left in that cesspool.
She is literally helping keep that Nazi shithole afloat and legitimate. Should bail and see who really listens.
I'd beg to differ. Although it's true that the ratio of neo-Nazis and generally just far right freaks has far surpassed the number of everyday people, that doesn't mean those people don't exist anymore.
I always bring this up in conversations about leaving social networks, because if you don't understand it, it will warp your entire perspective of why people stay on shitty platforms in the first place. The Network Effect is what keeps people hooked on these platforms, even when the owner becomes a literal neo-Nazi.
The people who have already left are the ones that are capable of and willing to sacrifice the scale, reach, and history that Twitter has, in the hopes that whatever platform they move to will treat them better. Leaving Twitter means deleting your digital history, erasing every connection you've made on the platform, and entirely cutting all of your messaging off from anyone who hasn't yet left.
AOC is already on alternative platforms like Bluesky, so people who are willing and able to move, that would otherwise have stayed solely because she was still on Twitter have already done so. The people that remain do not remain because of her, they remain because of everybody else.
Yes, there are still quite a few neo-Nazis outnumbering the average person on there, but there are still quite a few average people that are still on Twitter. Don't forget that the average person doesn't seem to care when the companies they buy products from exploit child labor, fund wars that keep oil prices low, and suppress the wages of the workers in their own communities. The average person simply does not have the will to sacrifice what they must give up by leaving a large platform like Twitter, so they remain there.
If AOC didn't benefit politically from being on Twitter, then she would have entirely left and deleted her account a while ago.
Oh look, a bunch of mental gymnastics justifying staying at the Nazi table.
It’s pathetic and attempting to rationalize with Nazis is a waste of time and energy. She should stop playing games with fashists and have auto posts telling people to leave.
How about people get the fuck over the corporate fomo and do something like getting up and walking away from a Nazi platform instead of being apathetic.
One method used to reduce radicalisation in a group session is to have one person ask awkward questions.
As demonstrated by research by Milgram's obedience study and Ash's line study having a single descenter is a powerful tool for helping people resist social pressure.
There is one reason to be at a nazi table which is to be disruptive
Since 2015, after decades of smearing the Mainstream Media, the MAGA Nazis have been coming on the very shows they have been disparaging, and spewing their propaganda alternative facts to regular Americans who haven't discovered, or avoid the Conservative Propaganda Machine. They realized the power of getting on the enemy's platform, and poisoning the water.
That's why AOC, and anyone else who wants to fight back, goes on Twitter. To force the enemy to see the other side, whether they like it or not. If they are totally immersed in the Conservative Propaganda Machine, then this might be the only way they'll ever hear an alternative view.
You don’t listen to the other side when you are as brainwashed as trump supporters are.
You have to kill the platform, not keep it legitimate. Every single reasonable human has left at this point.
You can keep arguing that "nobody left on that platform is going to be convinced of anything anymore," but the fact of the matter is there are hundreds of millions of active users there, the vast majority of whom don't give a shit about Musk, and aren't as in-the-know about a lot of the current goings on that most Lemmy users whine about. As a politician trying to push progressive causes, AOC is on there for the same reason Musk is: it's the platform with the most reach. It would be stupid of her to leave the platform. She has tons of followers, only a few of which would follow her to a different platform. It's also the platform her opponents are on, and that's the only place she can realistically call them out on their bullshit and her message be seen.
Does AOC have poor intel/analysts on this?
(Posting under assumption you & I believe AOC dislikes Musk, dislikes Nazis, would wave a magic wand to poof! Twitter if she found one under her pillow; nvm if assumption is misfounded)
Yes, now you are getting it.
its call hate-engaging, hatewatching shes is enabling it to be honest. or engaging just to argue with people like AOC.