5 ms·

> If one believes Twitter has a free speech problem Twitter HAS a free speech problem. This is not controversial. Now you may not agree that Twitter SHOULD all

by gwn7 4y ago

> If one believes Twitter has a free speech problem Twitter HAS a free speech problem. This is not controversial. Now you may not agree that Twitter SHOULD allow free speech, but you can not deny that censorship exists on Twitter and it is serving the political agenda of some people.

cycrutchfield 4y ago
Which political agenda is that? The one that is against hate speech, misinformation, and threats of violence?
- ecshafer 4y ago
  Define misinformation. Tech misinformation is interesting because a Chinese government account gets a flag and an American government account doesn't. A company pr account doesn't get a bias flag, but it is wholly designed around spreading misinformation. Misinformation seems to be used as an argument against not only free speech, but only leaning towards very specific directions politically.
- gwn7 4y ago
  What makes you think that all the censored stuff is about hate speech, misinformation and threats of violence? To think that you must be either very naive or benefiting from that political agenda yourself. There are hundreds of records of censored content which doesn't have anything to do with all that. This is a fact whether you agree with it or not.
- leadingthenet 4y ago
  Yes, that one. Some people (me included) have strong reservations about whether that’s an achievable and / or desirable goal.
- JohnWhigham 4y ago
  Suspending the New York Post's account for posting the Hunter Biden laptop story.
staz 4y ago
> Twitter HAS a free speech problem. This is not controversial. Twitter has limitations on free speech, it's totally debatable if that's a problem or not.
- gwn7 4y ago
  Ok, fair point. So let's not say that "Twitter has a free speech problem". But let's also not say that "Twitter has limitations on free speech" because it feels like a misleading euphemism. Free speech is not a spectrum. You either have it or not. How about we just say that "Twitter doesn't have free speech". And yes, "it's totally debatable if that's a problem or not". That I agree.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
michaelgrosner2 4y ago
Twitter does not have a free speech problem. Twitter is not the US government, it's a private organization, and has no obligation to allow any speech it does not want on its platform. If it serves the political agenda of some people, that is entirely within it's own free speech right and we should celebrate its ability to, or found new organizations to compete its free speech.
trevorboaconstr 4y ago
Why is Twitters position on what type of content it allows a ‘problem’ given it’s a private company? The companies that run social media can legally censor and remove publicly, and privately, posted content. They can also ban, suspend, or limit users, for pretty much any reason. Have we become so delusional that we can’t recognize this simple fact?
- psyc 4y ago
  Why is it a problem if Uber drivers have to roll a 1D20 when they pick you up, and drive away laughing "owned!" every time they roll 1? They're a private company. It adds a little harmless fun and excitement. There's no law saying they have to have you as a passenger. Therefore, nobody should complain or get upset?
dragonwriter 4y ago
> Twitter HAS a free speech problem. No, it doesn't. > This is not controversial. If you keep getting in arguments about something, it's pretty silly to claim there is no controversy. > Now you may not agree that Twitter SHOULD allow free speech If you don't agree that Twitter should do something that it currently isn't, you by definition don't see it as having a problem in that behavioral domain. > but you can not deny that censorship exists on Twitter and it is serving the political agenda of some people. Private actors controlling the use of their private resources to select which ideas they will and will not promote with them is called “free speech”. So, you seem to think Twitter’s problem is that they exercise free speech.
- gwn7 4y ago
  > Private actors controlling the use of their private resources to select which ideas they will and will not promote with them is called “free speech”. I have to admit that this makes sense. But still kinda disturbing in this case. Because when the private resource we're talking about is Twitter, the actors behind can exercise their right of free speech for mass manipulation. That's too much power. I guess this is the problematic part. It's not exactly the same thing as the right to free speech of a single individual or a small company. Your logic is sound, but sometimes scale changes the rules. Especially in this very special case where Twitter has become the digital equivalent of a global town square. That's the catch. Anyway maybe my quick arguments weren't very good after all. But do you really not see any problems with Twitter lately? Is everything okay? You seem smart. I'm genuniely curious.

by gwn7 4y ago

cycrutchfield 4y ago

Which political agenda is that? The one that is against hate speech, misinformation, and threats of violence?

ecshafer 4y ago
Define misinformation. Tech misinformation is interesting because a Chinese government account gets a flag and an American government account doesn't. A company pr account doesn't get a bias flag, but it is wholly designed around spreading misinformation. Misinformation seems to be used as an argument against not only free speech, but only leaning towards very specific directions politically.
gwn7 4y ago
What makes you think that all the censored stuff is about hate speech, misinformation and threats of violence? To think that you must be either very naive or benefiting from that political agenda yourself. There are hundreds of records of censored content which doesn't have anything to do with all that. This is a fact whether you agree with it or not.
leadingthenet 4y ago
Yes, that one. Some people (me included) have strong reservations about whether that’s an achievable and / or desirable goal.
JohnWhigham 4y ago
Suspending the New York Post's account for posting the Hunter Biden laptop story.

staz 4y ago

> Twitter HAS a free speech problem. This is not controversial. Twitter has limitations on free speech, it's totally debatable if that's a problem or not.

gwn7 4y ago
Ok, fair point. So let's not say that "Twitter has a free speech problem". But let's also not say that "Twitter has limitations on free speech" because it feels like a misleading euphemism. Free speech is not a spectrum. You either have it or not. How about we just say that "Twitter doesn't have free speech". And yes, "it's totally debatable if that's a problem or not". That I agree.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

michaelgrosner2 4y ago

Twitter does not have a free speech problem. Twitter is not the US government, it's a private organization, and has no obligation to allow any speech it does not want on its platform. If it serves the political agenda of some people, that is entirely within it's own free speech right and we should celebrate its ability to, or found new organizations to compete its free speech.

trevorboaconstr 4y ago

Why is Twitters position on what type of content it allows a ‘problem’ given it’s a private company? The companies that run social media can legally censor and remove publicly, and privately, posted content. They can also ban, suspend, or limit users, for pretty much any reason. Have we become so delusional that we can’t recognize this simple fact?

psyc 4y ago
Why is it a problem if Uber drivers have to roll a 1D20 when they pick you up, and drive away laughing "owned!" every time they roll 1? They're a private company. It adds a little harmless fun and excitement. There's no law saying they have to have you as a passenger. Therefore, nobody should complain or get upset?

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Twitter HAS a free speech problem. No, it doesn't. > This is not controversial. If you keep getting in arguments about something, it's pretty silly to claim there is no controversy. > Now you may not agree that Twitter SHOULD allow free speech If you don't agree that Twitter should do something that it currently isn't, you by definition don't see it as having a problem in that behavioral domain. > but you can not deny that censorship exists on Twitter and it is serving the political agenda of some people. Private actors controlling the use of their private resources to select which ideas they will and will not promote with them is called “free speech”. So, you seem to think Twitter’s problem is that they exercise free speech.

gwn7 4y ago
> Private actors controlling the use of their private resources to select which ideas they will and will not promote with them is called “free speech”. I have to admit that this makes sense. But still kinda disturbing in this case. Because when the private resource we're talking about is Twitter, the actors behind can exercise their right of free speech for mass manipulation. That's too much power. I guess this is the problematic part. It's not exactly the same thing as the right to free speech of a single individual or a small company. Your logic is sound, but sometimes scale changes the rules. Especially in this very special case where Twitter has become the digital equivalent of a global town square. That's the catch. Anyway maybe my quick arguments weren't very good after all. But do you really not see any problems with Twitter lately? Is everything okay? You seem smart. I'm genuniely curious.