Trump is shut out, while other hate preachers and killers continue on twitter without consequences!

[Subduction Zone]

It does show at least some of the tweets in full, for example consider this one https://mobile.twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1003332853525110784

Try explaining how that is not hate speech which incites violence

It looks like it to me But one thing to remember is that Twitter is an American company. Right now they are protected from being sued by people reacting to the tweets on their site. Ironically Trump wanted to take away the protection that allowed him to tweet at all:

Section 230, the internet free speech law Trump wants to repeal, explained

Right now ISO's are not liable for the bad acts of those that use Twitter, Facebook, etc.. If that protection was taken away the internet would become as bland as wonder bread and Dairy Queen "vanilla" ice milk.

 

[stvdv]

I trust the federal government less.
Heaven forbid that they get in the business
of actually requiring platforms to involuntarily
post calls for insurrection.

I see, I am not the only one having trust issues

And once again, Trump could create his
own platform. He has the money.

He said already he would do that. But that's just talk of him I think, talk is what they usually do best

Question: IF Trump creates his own platform, with the same violent posts, I guess it should be taken down too, because it's the same US threat????

 

[Revoltingest]

Question: IF Trump creates his own platform, with the same violent posts, I guess it should be taken down too, because it's the same US threat????

His posts on Twitter & Facebook don't appear to be
clearly criminal. If he had his own platform, he could
continue as before. But if he crossed the line into
clear calls for violence, he could be shut down.
That's not really censorship of free speech.

 

[stvdv]

Do you have examples of this? Quoting the Quran does not help you since by that standard you would have to ban all Christians too.

Would not be too bad (or even good). No good to anyone to read about Hell and killing others, just because allegedly God has said so (IMO)

As to your search, perhaps your terms changed. Or perhaps they were merely bogus claims and they disappeared. One thing that people do not understand is that hits in an internet search do not qualify as evidence.

Oh, no. I did check the sites and viewed the disturbing images (maybe downloaded them, because I expected them to disappear). All gone now.

 

[stvdv]

His posts on Twitter & Facebook don't appear to be
clearly criminal. If he had his own platform, he could
continue as before. But if he crossed the line into
clear calls for violence, he could be shut down.
That's not really censorship of free speech.

Interesting, don't you think? Clear call for violence is the limit

How about violence towards others? That is even worse, because it's an act of violence, not just a call for an act of violence (not yet done)

I am thinking about "posting naked pictures of girls", so many children suffer from social media abuse making fun of others
That is real violence. And I think social media should ban these immediately. All this violence on social media destroys many lives
It's not just Trump's call for violence, with only 5 deaths. How many kids commit suicide because classmates post horrible pictures of them?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I wonder how one company, with finite resources, can manage to silence absolutely all of those things considered (after careful reading) "against our standards." How many people do they have doing the reading, compared to how many are doing the writing?

I can find historical references to other attempts to silence dissent: book burnings, or being listed on the Catholic "Index," for example. But copies of the books burned, and copies of those refused the "nihil obstat" imprimatur remain with us to this day. I've read lots of them, and I'm only minimally tainted by it.

How much better it might to teach people to read using some minimal level of the critical faculty, than to try to ensure nobody ever sees anything that some "body" deems inappropriate?

 

[Kenny]

Do two wrongs make a right?

One wrong doesn't make it right.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Can't help but add to this thread that today, Twitter has suspended more than 70,000 QANON suporters.

So maybe it's not just poor Donny being singled out for mistreatment.

 

[Secret Chief]

One wrong doesn't make it right.

I agree.
And neither does pointing to another wrong make something that is wrong, right.

 

[Kenny]

I agree.
And neither does pointing to another wrong make something that is wrong, right.

Are you saying that if one pointing to something that is right, makes it right? I've lost something in this thread

so back to the OP... there is a double standard.

 

[sun rise]

What others are fomenting insurrection on the platforms though?
Speech off platform shouldn't be at issue.

Twitter has rules just like RF has rules. Those who violate the rules on any platform are subject to moderation.

People of course complain about the rules including their not being administered fairly but that's the nature of people and the internet.

If I used RF as an example, someone who say is popular with 35% of the posters here is banned for something considered to be an egregious violation of RF rules, that is tough. Internet sites can create rules and people who use those sites are expected to abide by those rules. The Twitter Rules some given below are pretty clear to me.

Violence: You may not threaten violence against an individual or a group of people. We also prohibit the glorification of violence. Learn more about our violent threat and glorification of violence policies.

Terrorism/violent extremism: You may not threaten or promote terrorism or violent extremism.
...
Abuse/harassment: You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. This includes wishing or hoping that someone experiences physical harm. Learn more.

Hateful conduct: You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, caste, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease.

 

[sun rise]

In my opinion, social media platforms need to be regulated and the first order of business should be holding them to their own terms of service combined with making sure they are applying their terms of service across the board evenly to everyone, rather than applying them to some people or groups and not to others.

As for Fox complaining that social media platforms have one standard for some, and a different standard for others, I can only say that I have always been grateful to them for their 'fair and balanced' coverage of every person and group they 'report' on. Murdoch has done so much over the decades to set a sterling and shining standard for fairness and intellectual honesty that so many of us Americans nowadays aspire to live up to. A true benefactor of humanity, that man.

If sarcasm is a knife, you've just sliced the Earth in two pieces.

 

[sun rise]

It looks like it to me But one thing to remember is that Twitter is an American company. Right now they are protected from being sued by people reacting to the tweets on their site. Ironically Trump wanted to take away the protection that allowed him to tweet at all:

Section 230, the internet free speech law Trump wants to repeal, explained

Right now ISO's are not liable for the bad acts of those that use Twitter, Facebook, etc.. If that protection was taken away the internet would become as bland as wonder bread and Dairy Queen "vanilla" ice milk.

Just think without Section 230, censorship would get much more egregious with people being kicked off much more often.

We'd also take a giant step in becoming more like the horror show that is China.

 

[Sunstone]

so back to the OP... there is a double standard.

I don't know much about Twitter. I haven't seen any reports on it that are relevant here.

On the other hand, it amuses me when anyone accuses FaceBook of only ever favoring the left. Mark Zuckerberg is an interesting man, don't you think? Someday, when you have time, Ken, you might find it illuminating to dig into the politics of his house guests as well as the politics of their FaceBook platforms. Then, just for kicks, compare what you learn with FaceBook's terms of service. It will be so much more instructive and convincing, I think, if you do the legwork yourself.

By the way, I am genuinely concerned about FaceBook's ad hoc approach to moderation. In the end, it's a threat to both sides.

 

[Revoltingest]

Interesting, don't you think? Clear call for violence is the limit

How about violence towards others? That is even worse, because it's an act of violence, not just a call for an act of violence (not yet done)

I am thinking about "posting naked pictures of girls", so many children suffer from social media abuse making fun of others
That is real violence. And I think social media should ban these immediately. All this violence on social media destroys many lives
It's not just Trump's call for violence, with only 5 deaths. How many kids commit suicide because classmates post horrible pictures of them?

Standards are indeed complex.

 

[Kenny]

By the way, I am genuinely concerned about FaceBook's ad hoc approach to moderation. In the end, it's a threat to both sides.

That is all I am trying to convey!

Certainly threats anywhere is wrong... but we seek out those who make the threats, not the platform they used (unless the platforms only desire is to promote threats) which I don't think Parler is about.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see, I am not the only one having trust issues


He said already he would do that. But that's just talk of him I think, talk is what they usually do best

Question: IF Trump creates his own platform, with the same violent posts, I guess it should be taken down too, because it's the same US threat????

If he created his own platform it could not be taken down. Parler does not own the servers needed to respond to people. They used those of Amazon's cloud service. Amazon decided that they were bad for their company and found an excuse to sever the relationship.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Would not be too bad (or even good). No good to anyone to read about Hell and killing others, just because allegedly God has said so (IMO)


Oh, no. I did check the sites and viewed the disturbing images (maybe downloaded them, because I expected them to disappear). All gone now.

Do you have specific examples? There are many fake images out there. They could have been taken down as a result of a stop and desist order. Just because an image disappears does not mean hat something fishy is going on.

 

[Stevicus]

On Friday, Twitter decided that Donald Trump will lose his account and be locked out for life. The president then had over 75 million followers.

Now many are reacting to what they believe is double standards from Twitter. Fox News has created an article that focuses on the types who are allowed to write freely on Twitter. They have only a small selection of what they call "some of the world's most hateful and dangerous voices," but it is illustrative enough.

The list includes Iran's top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who operates completely freely on Twitter. He is an anti-Semitist and calls for the killing of Jews on twitter.

I think it is very strange that so many newspapers do not write about this.

Twitter bans Trump, but Iranian ayatollah, Louis Farrakhan, Chinese propagandists still active | Fox News

Well, I suppose if they have rules which apply to all users, then they should enforce them consistently. Otherwise it makes it look like they're playing favorites.

 

[stvdv]

Do you have specific examples? There are many fake images out there. They could have been taken down as a result of a stop and desist order. Just because an image disappears does not mean hat something fishy is going on.

I am talking about more than 10 examples, so NO, I was not talking about fake images on the net
Not fishy, clearly they cleaned out the internet to give the new president a clean start

They do the same in Holland with stories about our king
It's all about one's image, so one's images do count