3 ms·
You're saying that, because Twitter is not allowing a custom emoji who's entire reason for existing is to be a negative attack on someone, it's censorship?
by s73v3r_ 8y ago
You're saying that, because Twitter is not allowing a custom emoji who's entire reason for existing is to be a negative attack on someone, it's censorship?
- dingo_bat 8y agoYes. "Negative attacks", as defined by you, are still free speech. Twitter is free to censor it, but we should point it out as censorship.
- s73v3r_ 8y agoNo, we absolutely should not point it out as censorship, because it has not met the bar. By your logic, taking down a post of someone being doxxed is also censorship.
- wybiral 8y agoSure, but it isn't biased censorship. It is censoring attacks against individuals regardless of their origin. If the Clinton campaign ran an ad that was targeting Trump in a similarly negative way and Twitter allowed that, then it would be bias. But so far I haven't seen that counterexample.