> was the dubious claims being made in the Twitter thread about how Amazon's policies were bad for the consumer.
This isn't a disproveable factual claim.
Something being "bad" is an opinion.
It is also a secondary interpretation. Someone being bad at economics is not defamation.
Defamation would be more like, if someone claimed that Amazon was, I don't know, stealing money from your Amazon account. Because that's a factual action.
Interpreting how amazons actions effect other people is an opinion, not a claim.
And once again, Amazon agrees with me, not you, because they aren't suing anyone for defamation.
This isn't a disproveable factual claim.
Something being "bad" is an opinion.
It is also a secondary interpretation. Someone being bad at economics is not defamation.
Defamation would be more like, if someone claimed that Amazon was, I don't know, stealing money from your Amazon account. Because that's a factual action.
Interpreting how amazons actions effect other people is an opinion, not a claim.
And once again, Amazon agrees with me, not you, because they aren't suing anyone for defamation.