4 ms·

People love having their speech limited, I'm sure this will work out great for twitter.

croon 10y ago
> People love having their speech limited, I'm sure this will work out great for twitter. I love having hate speech limited, if that's what you mean.
- hermiti 10y ago
  The problem with banning hate speech is that it is relative. Next up, books will be banned because they incite alternate opinions.
  - beedogs 10y ago
    Yeah... probably not.
    - hermiti 10y ago
      You're right... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_govern...
  - croon 10y ago
    Mind sharing an example/hypothetical of it being relative?
  - derrickdirge 10y ago
    There's a difference between mere 'alternate opinions' and hateful, prejudiced opinions. It's seems disingenuous for you to conflate them.
    - snerbles 10y ago
      The line between the two varies, and is subject to the whims of whoever controls the platform.
  - cwisecarver 10y ago
    The even bigger problem is we're assuming they were banned for "hate" speech because Twitter hasn't even said why yet. If they took down tweets that they felt were hate speech and communicated to the speaker and the community I would be more okay with it. A silent ban of dozens of accounts is their right as a business but I'll still say it's a stupid decision.
  - gaius 10y ago
    Bear in mind that some people consider this site to be sexist and racist - check out the #hnwatch hashtag on Twitter. Everyone commenting here "good", consider that as a member of HN, others tar you with the same brush. Still so happy?
    - dictum 10y ago
      > check out the #hnwatch hashtag on Twitter I didn't know that hashtag and was not surprised to see that one of its regular users is someone who likes to use autism as a metaphor for men working in tech.
- matwood 10y ago
  As long as it is applied consistently. Are they also banning those spewing hate for Trump or the police? It is just like everyone who is rioting with slogans like 'not my President.' These same people were giving Trump a hard time when he said the election system was rigged and didn't enthusiastically say he would support the results of the election. The left is doing a good job reenforcing the exact image many people voted against. The elitist attitude of tolerance unless disagreed with. EDIT Thanks for the downvotes and further proving my point. I would never vote for Trump, but simply pointing out hypocrisy and double standards does get people upset.
- altaway 10y ago
  There are plain facts about the world which are often considered "hate speech". FBI crime statistics, for example. They gotta be banned to maintain the narrative.
edc117 10y ago
Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences, and Twitter is free to do as they like with their platform.
- Cthulhu_ 10y ago
  They're just kinda late, IMO.
- problems 10y ago
  While I agree with your statement, I think it's important to protect the concept of free speech in many places and to disrespect companies who don't. Twitter has failed to do so here and is showing a blatant political statement (unless there were specific cases of harassment with these people or something, in which case I may be overstepping). I think generally views like this are better left in the spotlight of the public where they can be properly argued with and not dragged into private forums and facebook feeds where it's much harder for people to see a wider response to them. Banning them is harmful to people who are getting a casual interest in their ideas and start reading up on it. When the only place they can do that is Breitbart or similar, how do you think that'll go?
  - derrickdirge 10y ago
    >Twitter has failed to do so here and is showing a blatant political statement (unless there were specific cases of harassment with these people or something, in which case I may be overstepping). Everyone keeps making comments like this. "This is a massive injustice! Unless Twitter was justified idk." Maybe we should wait for a statement from Twitter before passing judgment.
    - DanBC 10y ago
      Twitter was asked for a statement, and has declined to comment. Which is a shame, because if they're banning a bunch of abusive harassing arseholes that's a good thing and I want to know about it.
  - edc117 10y ago
nameless912 10y ago
This isn't the limitation of free speech, this is a private company telling one of its users that they aren't welcome due to their behavior. It's like if you were at a store and started soapboxing about <insert alt right conspiracy bullshit here> loudly right in front of the register, the manager of the store is 100% allowed to ask you to leave. Freedom of speech means your speech isn't illegal, not that you will suffer no consequences for it. ETA: some people made some comments below this that made me want to clarify a few things: 1) Twitter being publicly traded does not automatically make them beholden to every person on Earth, especially in matters of free speech. They're still allowed governing their platform in whatever way they see fit. 2) a better analogy might be a comedy club on open mic nigh.t. If you get up on stage and start making racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. Jokes the club owner has every right to throw you out. Yes, it's a public forum, but limiting your use of what is ultimately a private (i.e. not government owned) establishment does not constitute a violation of your rights unless it can be proven that you were denied access due to your membership in a protected class, or based on your gender, etc. Free speech doesn't protect you from (peaceful and appropriate) backlash.
- corey_moncure 10y ago
  I think your analogy falls a little flat because 'right in front of the register' at a store isn't literally purpose-built to be a speech platform, as Twitter is.
- hammock 10y ago
  He's not commenting whether it's right or not. He's just saying people won't like it
- CoryG89 10y ago
  Except that Twitter is not a private company. They are a publicly traded corporation.
- ftrflyr 10y ago
  Twitter is very much a public company beholden to its shareholders.
- 10y ago
mrgoldenbrown 10y ago
Not limiting speech wasn't really working out for them either. Abusive users was one of the reasons floated for their difficulty selling.

croon 10y ago

> People love having their speech limited, I'm sure this will work out great for twitter. I love having hate speech limited, if that's what you mean.

hermiti 10y ago
The problem with banning hate speech is that it is relative. Next up, books will be banned because they incite alternate opinions.
- beedogs 10y ago
  Yeah... probably not.
  - hermiti 10y ago
    You're right... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_govern...
- croon 10y ago
  Mind sharing an example/hypothetical of it being relative?
- derrickdirge 10y ago
  There's a difference between mere 'alternate opinions' and hateful, prejudiced opinions. It's seems disingenuous for you to conflate them.
  - snerbles 10y ago
    The line between the two varies, and is subject to the whims of whoever controls the platform.
- cwisecarver 10y ago
  The even bigger problem is we're assuming they were banned for "hate" speech because Twitter hasn't even said why yet. If they took down tweets that they felt were hate speech and communicated to the speaker and the community I would be more okay with it. A silent ban of dozens of accounts is their right as a business but I'll still say it's a stupid decision.
- gaius 10y ago
  Bear in mind that some people consider this site to be sexist and racist - check out the #hnwatch hashtag on Twitter. Everyone commenting here "good", consider that as a member of HN, others tar you with the same brush. Still so happy?
  - dictum 10y ago
    > check out the #hnwatch hashtag on Twitter I didn't know that hashtag and was not surprised to see that one of its regular users is someone who likes to use autism as a metaphor for men working in tech.
matwood 10y ago
As long as it is applied consistently. Are they also banning those spewing hate for Trump or the police? It is just like everyone who is rioting with slogans like 'not my President.' These same people were giving Trump a hard time when he said the election system was rigged and didn't enthusiastically say he would support the results of the election. The left is doing a good job reenforcing the exact image many people voted against. The elitist attitude of tolerance unless disagreed with. EDIT Thanks for the downvotes and further proving my point. I would never vote for Trump, but simply pointing out hypocrisy and double standards does get people upset.
altaway 10y ago
There are plain facts about the world which are often considered "hate speech". FBI crime statistics, for example. They gotta be banned to maintain the narrative.

edc117 10y ago

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences, and Twitter is free to do as they like with their platform.

Cthulhu_ 10y ago
They're just kinda late, IMO.
problems 10y ago
While I agree with your statement, I think it's important to protect the concept of free speech in many places and to disrespect companies who don't. Twitter has failed to do so here and is showing a blatant political statement (unless there were specific cases of harassment with these people or something, in which case I may be overstepping). I think generally views like this are better left in the spotlight of the public where they can be properly argued with and not dragged into private forums and facebook feeds where it's much harder for people to see a wider response to them. Banning them is harmful to people who are getting a casual interest in their ideas and start reading up on it. When the only place they can do that is Breitbart or similar, how do you think that'll go?
- derrickdirge 10y ago
  >Twitter has failed to do so here and is showing a blatant political statement (unless there were specific cases of harassment with these people or something, in which case I may be overstepping). Everyone keeps making comments like this. "This is a massive injustice! Unless Twitter was justified idk." Maybe we should wait for a statement from Twitter before passing judgment.
  - DanBC 10y ago
    Twitter was asked for a statement, and has declined to comment. Which is a shame, because if they're banning a bunch of abusive harassing arseholes that's a good thing and I want to know about it.
- edc117 10y ago

nameless912 10y ago

This isn't the limitation of free speech, this is a private company telling one of its users that they aren't welcome due to their behavior. It's like if you were at a store and started soapboxing about <insert alt right conspiracy bullshit here> loudly right in front of the register, the manager of the store is 100% allowed to ask you to leave. Freedom of speech means your speech isn't illegal, not that you will suffer no consequences for it. ETA: some people made some comments below this that made me want to clarify a few things: 1) Twitter being publicly traded does not automatically make them beholden to every person on Earth, especially in matters of free speech. They're still allowed governing their platform in whatever way they see fit. 2) a better analogy might be a comedy club on open mic nigh.t. If you get up on stage and start making racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. Jokes the club owner has every right to throw you out. Yes, it's a public forum, but limiting your use of what is ultimately a private (i.e. not government owned) establishment does not constitute a violation of your rights unless it can be proven that you were denied access due to your membership in a protected class, or based on your gender, etc. Free speech doesn't protect you from (peaceful and appropriate) backlash.

corey_moncure 10y ago
I think your analogy falls a little flat because 'right in front of the register' at a store isn't literally purpose-built to be a speech platform, as Twitter is.
hammock 10y ago
He's not commenting whether it's right or not. He's just saying people won't like it
CoryG89 10y ago
Except that Twitter is not a private company. They are a publicly traded corporation.
ftrflyr 10y ago
Twitter is very much a public company beholden to its shareholders.
10y ago

mrgoldenbrown 10y ago

Not limiting speech wasn't really working out for them either. Abusive users was one of the reasons floated for their difficulty selling.