Meet Yoel Roth - Twitter's "Head of Site Integrity"

[WuWei]

@JayJay

Figuratively speaking.

The fact-checking team does not report to Roth. He’s not even in their hierarchy.

I’ll look at any evidence you have.

[WuWei]

@JayJay

The CEC has you angry at the wrong guy. There’s no relationship between Roth and the fact checkers that’s analogous to the relationship between Trump and the CDC or Trump and Cuomo.

Who’s the right guy?

I’m not angry.

[JayJay]

I told you already.

The fact checkers report to the same bosses Roth reports to.

Roth’s team is a SUB-team of the group that also has the fact checkers in it.

There’s no reporting relationship one way or the other between them.

[WuWei]

@JayJay

I told you already.

The fact checkers report to the same bosses Roth reports to.

Roth’s team is a SUB-team of the group that also has the fact checkers in it.

There’s no reporting relationship one way or the other between them.

You telling is not evidence.

[JayJay]

Of course it is.

[FreeAndClear]

@JayJay

Of course it is.

Lolz - anecdotes!

[WuWei]

@JayJay

Of course it is.

Well, it may be to me, but others are reading the thread. Do it for your fellow man.

[conan]

That’s what I do.

[conan]

And there it is.

@PurpnGold

My example applies to public and private restrooms.

[JayJay]

@DougBH

@merickson

When the personal integrity of a fact checker is challenged, that’s a big hint that the facts that they report are likely correct. “If you can’t attack the message, attack the messenger.”

Either that, or its a sign that the personal integrity of the fact checker stinks and you can only expect biased garbage as a result of anything he does.

If he was actually the fact checker or if he managed the fact checkers, you might be right…alas, the CEC has trolled its own viewers and listeners yet again and gotten them gunned up against the wrong guy.

[WuWei]

Still no evidence. Sounds like Trump’s “coffee guy”.

[JayJay]

@WuWei

Still no evidence. Sounds like Trump’s “coffee guy”.

You’ll have to learn to live with disappointment…

[Mountain_Soldier]

@JayJay

I told you already.

The fact checkers report to the same bosses Roth reports to.

Roth’s team is a SUB-team of the group that also has the fact checkers in it.

There’s no reporting relationship one way or the other between them.

I’ll believe that when they fact check anyone on the left.

[WuWei]

@JayJay

@WuWei

Still no evidence. Sounds like Trump’s “coffee guy”.

You’ll have to learn to live with disappointment…

I have.

[Zander]

@markdido

@Auto129

Twitter should stay quiet on their new feature, and the staff behind it.

Just put that little link under Trump’s lying as often as possible. He can’t do anything but get mad about it.

Sure.

Twitter Stasi.

Why not?

The East Germans were notorious for including fact check monikers after their free press articles, I’ll give you that. Excellent comparison.

[Zander]

@SeaManatee

Trump is over here using twitter to accuse people of murder for luls and people are digging through some guy’s post history trying to find bias. Ah Hah, here’s the problem!

It is really, really hard to care. Show me that this guy is the one person responsible for deciding the fate of everyone’s twitter content and then show his history of actions he’s taken in his job.

Fact check - it’s actually impossible to care.

[DougBH]

@PurpnGold

@WuWei

Private - My ranch, my rules.

Not if you run a public facing business. You have rules to follow.

Yeah, I guess that’s what Trump is arguing about Twitter.

[PurpnGold]

@DougBH

Yeah, I guess that’s what Trump is arguing about Twitter.

He is arguing that Twitter is blocking him or his tweets?

[Paul_Thomson]

@toreyj01

Singling this guy out is just inviting crazed followers of Trump to target him, which is tantamount to intimidation. Bad mojo.

So, individual anti-Trumpers cannot be held personally accountable for their own words, but their opinions must be treated as anonymous. Does that standard apply to pro-Trumpers as well?

[wiley8425]

Not exactly easy to apply that standard when they go out of their way to make themselves known, is it?