3 ms·
I disagree with your assumption that a lack of censorship means total anarchy. Consider that Twitter has cultivated an environment conducive to politics and jou
by ng12 8y ago
I disagree with your assumption that a lack of censorship means total anarchy. Consider that Twitter has cultivated an environment conducive to politics and journalism. It's not that Alex Jones is off-topic it's that he's saying disagreeable things.
> We already have a tonne of mechanisms by which anybody can say anything they like, within the confines of the law, and ignoring that arguably infowars breaks that, why does _everything_ need to be like that?
Because digital communication is important, and I think it should follow the same mechanisms as analog communication.
- annabellish 8y ago>It's not that Alex Jones is off-topic it's that he's saying disagreeable things. I think this is the central disagreement. He _is_ breaking the rules of twitter, by any interpretation, but even were he not, I don't think you can just wipe away concerns with that the things he's saying are "disagreeable". We're having a lot of problems currently around the fact that we have people who have gotten very good at propagandising and communicating in malicious, duplicitous ways. Alex Jones and friends aren't coming to the table in good faith, and asking to be treated as if they are is one of the tools they're using to twist polite discourse for their own profit. While it's incredibly important that anybody who has something to say in good faith be allowed to say it, we still need to be able to protect ourselves against people like Alex Jones, who is simply trying to extract profit from a gullible audience.