The new meaning of "unsafe"

Submitted by Anon (Israel), Nov 26, 2016 at 16:12

A few weeks ago I clicked a link on Twitter and came up against a warning by Twitter that the page I requested is deemed to be 'unsafe'. It then explained this could mean that browsing the page could damage my computer(!) or that it might contain be that Twitter is opposed to the contents of the page.

Note the way Twitter conflates the old meaning of the term 'unsafe' with its new, left-wing, politically correct, "cry-bully" contemporary meaning, leaving would-be viewers with no idea of whether the page would damage their computers or their minds. The way Twitter does it, you'd think the company itself can't work out whether the problem is with the viewpoints on the page or with malicious software.

Perhaps one day a company will sue for the malicious depiction of their site containing viruses which may damage one's computer.
Has there ever been a period of time in which terms were subverted to such an extent?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".