Hacker News Reader

This article literally has

>Twitter's technicality is a fig leaf to enable continued control of public discourse by an unelected private industry that is 9-to-1 in the tank for Democrats and can decide what Americans are allowed to know.

in the headline. Yes, thank you, I reject this authors "fact synthesis".

View on HN

OP isn’t citing it for the top-line conclusion, but for the bulk of the article that collects various references together.

It’s The Federalist. No one needs to read further than the URL to know how separate from reality everything the piece is.

The Federalist is like a conservative version of Mother Jones or HuffPo. Not what I’d consider reliable but it can collect together facts that can be verified that other organizations won’t necessarily put together. For example, there’s an article right now observing that, while we’ve had a Supreme Court with a majority of Republican appointees for 50 years, for a lot of that time it’s been appointees confirmed by a Democratic Senate. (Democrats held the Senate almost without any gap from 1936-1982.) So candidates that ended up getting wobbly like Souter and Stevens were compromise candidates. The NYT just isn’t going to highlight facts like that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com