9 ms·

No matter what you think of Jones: Silicon Valley is digging their own grave with their blatantly obvious double standards towards "hate speech" and other forms

No matter what you think of Jones: Silicon Valley is digging their own grave with their blatantly obvious double standards towards "hate speech" and other forms of harassment.

aqme28 8y ago
Agreed. They should have banned him far sooner.
MBCook 8y ago
Really? I’d say no matter what you think of Jones you should be celebrating this as it means Twitter is holding to their own published policies. The nonsense of banning people for X, unless they famous, unless they’re the wrong KIND of famous, or are being attacked by someone and asking “Why do they get to say X to me” stuff is a mess. How can anyone run a platform if the rules are in constant flux on a per day/user/reason/moon phase basis? Half the problem over the last few years is the quicksand of rules. Punishments applied unevenly start to look an awful lot favoritism even when there isn’t any there.
- sheepmullet 8y ago
  > celebrating this as it means Twitter is holding to their own published policies. Have they banned the racist New York Times editor yet?
  - MBCook 8y ago
    We already know certain people get special treatment. They were explicitly said it for the president. Jones certainly got it. I’m not sure who you’re talking about or what they did but I’ve always gotten the feeling that Twitter is very careful about messing with people who have any amount of power/fame. My position? Apply the rules to everyone who violates them no matter what. Twitter has shown that won’t do that. But I’ll take 40% enforcement over 5% enforcement.
    - sheepmullet 8y ago
      > But I’ll take 40% enforcement over 5% enforcement. A politically motivated 40% is far worse than a completely open forum.
    - funkythings 8y ago
      It's a NYT journalist that stated multiple times she hates white people. Like, really vile stuff. No ban, no 7 day suspension. Nothing. The NYT even defended her (Sarah Jong). Now, the crazy annoying right-winger Candance Owens just copied the same tweets and replaced white with black. What followed? Banned. Twitter does not uphold their now standard independent from political affiliation. They can do that, it's a private company, but they should not LIE about it.
      - sheepmullet 8y ago
        > The NYT even defended her (Sarah Jong). It’s even worse than simply defending her - the NYT admitted they knew about the tweets when they hired her! So in a competitive market like journalism where dozens of qualified candidates would have applied for the job the NYT deliberately chose the candidate who openly hates white people. And shortly before hiring her they ran an article stating it was good that Roseanne Barr was driven from the workplace because of a single racist joke she made. Alex Jones has more integrity than the NYT.
    - acdha 8y ago
      They’re talking about Sarah Jeong, who’s been the subject of one of the more recent made-up controversies various right-wingers are using as an chance to bond over their shared identity as self-perceived victims: https://www.vox.com/technology/2018/8/8/17661368/sarah-jeong-twitter-new-york-times-andrew-sullivan https://www.vox.com/technology/2018/8/8/17661368/sarah-jeong... The usual differences apply: she was making obvious jokes in the style of right-wing rhetoric (e.g. joking about how white people can’t handle the sun and need to live underground) about a group which has never been seriously threatened rather than repeating slurs which have serious history behind them, there was no sign of capacity or intent to do real harm, etc. Twitter doesn’t do nuance well but it’s about as accurate as thinking Swift made a serious proposal to eat poor children.
  - funkythings 8y ago
    Yeah, double standards. Unbelievable

No matter what you think of Jones: Silicon Valley is digging their own grave with their blatantly obvious double standards towards "hate speech" and other forms of harassment.

aqme28 8y ago

Agreed. They should have banned him far sooner.

MBCook 8y ago

Really? I’d say no matter what you think of Jones you should be celebrating this as it means Twitter is holding to their own published policies. The nonsense of banning people for X, unless they famous, unless they’re the wrong KIND of famous, or are being attacked by someone and asking “Why do they get to say X to me” stuff is a mess. How can anyone run a platform if the rules are in constant flux on a per day/user/reason/moon phase basis? Half the problem over the last few years is the quicksand of rules. Punishments applied unevenly start to look an awful lot favoritism even when there isn’t any there.

sheepmullet 8y ago
> celebrating this as it means Twitter is holding to their own published policies. Have they banned the racist New York Times editor yet?
- MBCook 8y ago
  We already know certain people get special treatment. They were explicitly said it for the president. Jones certainly got it. I’m not sure who you’re talking about or what they did but I’ve always gotten the feeling that Twitter is very careful about messing with people who have any amount of power/fame. My position? Apply the rules to everyone who violates them no matter what. Twitter has shown that won’t do that. But I’ll take 40% enforcement over 5% enforcement.
  - sheepmullet 8y ago
    > But I’ll take 40% enforcement over 5% enforcement. A politically motivated 40% is far worse than a completely open forum.
  - funkythings 8y ago
    It's a NYT journalist that stated multiple times she hates white people. Like, really vile stuff. No ban, no 7 day suspension. Nothing. The NYT even defended her (Sarah Jong). Now, the crazy annoying right-winger Candance Owens just copied the same tweets and replaced white with black. What followed? Banned. Twitter does not uphold their now standard independent from political affiliation. They can do that, it's a private company, but they should not LIE about it.
    - sheepmullet 8y ago
      > The NYT even defended her (Sarah Jong). It’s even worse than simply defending her - the NYT admitted they knew about the tweets when they hired her! So in a competitive market like journalism where dozens of qualified candidates would have applied for the job the NYT deliberately chose the candidate who openly hates white people. And shortly before hiring her they ran an article stating it was good that Roseanne Barr was driven from the workplace because of a single racist joke she made. Alex Jones has more integrity than the NYT.
  - acdha 8y ago
    They’re talking about Sarah Jeong, who’s been the subject of one of the more recent made-up controversies various right-wingers are using as an chance to bond over their shared identity as self-perceived victims: https://www.vox.com/technology/2018/8/8/17661368/sarah-jeong-twitter-new-york-times-andrew-sullivan https://www.vox.com/technology/2018/8/8/17661368/sarah-jeong... The usual differences apply: she was making obvious jokes in the style of right-wing rhetoric (e.g. joking about how white people can’t handle the sun and need to live underground) about a group which has never been seriously threatened rather than repeating slurs which have serious history behind them, there was no sign of capacity or intent to do real harm, etc. Twitter doesn’t do nuance well but it’s about as accurate as thinking Swift made a serious proposal to eat poor children.
- funkythings 8y ago
  Yeah, double standards. Unbelievable