16 ms·

Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they

Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. Kanye's ban, he's just a mentally ill person. I don't think he meant "death con" he just didn't know that it's actually "def con." His remarks are still reprehensible. Twitter's whole moderation problem has been it is very, very inconsistent. I've seen accounts from certain political persuasions be banned or suspended, but then I have seen someone openly tell someone to kill themselves (or that they deserve to be killed or beaten) and the tweet was never removed, and the person was never suspended/banned because of the account it was aimed at. The Onion has had some questionable pieces that weren't any better than what Babylon Bee had, and they were never touched. The moderation has to be consistent; I don't think a council is a bad idea, especially for bigger account bans. All that said, I hope Trump is never allowed back, but he probably will be. In any case, things have to be equally applied and that has not been the case to anyone paying attention. Even the doxing rules have basically been completely ignored if it were aimed at -some- people. Then, there are things like the Taliban, Russia, China, etc which have at times actively cheered on social media about the death of Americans or an American defeat... having active accounts but then you ban sitting members of the US government? (I think Trump deserved it, but there are others.) How does that make any sense at all?

pbreit 4y ago
"I hope Trump is never allowed back," Why?
- bitdestroyer 4y ago
  gestures broadly
- sg47 4y ago
  - base698 4y ago
    If democracy got you Trump why would more democracy be the solution?
    - khuey 4y ago
      Democracy didn't get us Trump. The Electoral College got us Trump.
      - partiallypro 4y ago
        The electoral college is still democratic. You're confusing direct democracy with democracy in general. The US is a Republic, which is democratic with general safeguards to prevent mob rule. I can't stand Trump but this is and always will be such a weak argument. If you can control the Senate you can win the electoral college and both parties have done so in the past 20 years back and forth very consistently. Trump would have lost to basically any other candidate, the Democrats have only themselves to blame.
        tomrod 4y ago
        > You're confusing direct democracy with democracy in general. No, you're confusing semantics. A Wyoming voter's vote counts several times more than a California's vote for the same position. Land borders shouldn't change your vote, that's _anti_-democratic and in favor of an unequal distribution of voting rights. We should call a spade a spade, and here the spade of the electoral college is clearly _not_ democracy when we no longer have to send state delegates across the barren frontier. You can toot the representative republic horn all you want, which is what the system is, but it is in error to call the existing system democratic or a democracy _until_ the electoral college is gone. It should be. It serves no purpose other than to suppress what the majority of the people want. Likewise for state-specific regulations for cross-union office, like for President. Do what you want for your own state representation (e.g. senator, governor) but the President should be the one person actually elected by a majority without shenanigans, whereas none is today.
      - 4y ago
jonny_eh 4y ago
"he's just a mentally ill person" That has very large influence and is spreading and inspiring hate [1]. Mentally ill or not, he's causing real-world damage. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/banner-kanye-right-los-angeles-freeway-antisemtic-group-rcna53653 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/banner-kanye-right-los-...
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  The premise of speech is damaging, unless it's slander / libel, is I think the main thing Elon Musk wants to change at Twitter.
  - floober 4y ago
    What about incitement to violence?
    - jokethrowaway 4y ago
      That's already illegal, report it to the police
      - pixl97 4y ago
        "Some guy in Russia told all the white men to rise up and kill all the jews and blacks" The police "again, that's the 23rd time today" This kinda breaks down at the global scale. I can call for violent acts at your front door from a continent away with impunity.
        robertlagrant 4y ago
        The main issue is violent acts, not the call for them. Whoever does something violent will not do so with impunity.
        pixl97 4y ago
        See, when you live a privileged and safe life these are some of the lies you believe. You are protected by your position in wealth, race, and maybe location. You're not black, or Jewish, or a unionist, and its all a big surprise when the angry mob does come for you. You yell "this is against the law!" And then only realize the person posting the hateful redeoric online was the officer that should be protecting you. The fascists call for violence is always a joke to them, until the moment it is not.
slg 4y ago
>Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. Twitter banned the Babylon Bee for targeting a random and rather anonymous bureaucrat that likely isn't among the 1000 most powerful people in government in the US for the sole purpose that she is trans. This targeting by the Babylon Bee and other conservative media has led to her getting death threats. Being a satire site doesn't mean we can laugh off all their behavior as a joke. Their behavior was a part of a harassment campaign against someone who is largely a private citizen in this instance. Stopping that doesn't seem like a mistake to me.
- partiallypro 4y ago
  The piece satirized the confusion between sex and gender. It has only been very, very recently that we have gone from "gender is a social construct" to "sex is a social construct." It's still a highly debated topic and well within the public sphere of debate. Also, this person was a public official and was in the news from general news outlets (named Woman of the Year) which puts them well within the public realm of ridicule, even if you or I don't agree with it. If the piece had advocated physical harm that would be much much different.
  - mbesto 4y ago
    > It has only been very, very recently that we have gone from "gender is a social construct" to "sex is a social construct." What? Since when is sex a social construct?
    - jl6 4y ago
      Some people believe sex is a spectrum, or that it can be changed, but it’s super-fringe and mostly reflects ignorance of the difference between sex and gender rather than being a serious philosophical position.
      - searealist 4y ago
DoctorNick 4y ago
> Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. They didn’t even make a joke. They just called trans woman a man. It was hate speech, pure and simple. I am very afraid for the future of twitter now. Hate speech is going to run rampant on that platform now.
- vdnkh 4y ago
  Not to mention that the person who attacked Pelosi's husband with a hammer was also posting transphobic crap (along with a lot of other right-wing garbage). Hate online definitely has real world impact.
  - gffrd 4y ago
    Hate anywhere has real world impact. There’s a lot of hate in the history books, 99% of it predating the internet. Are those that engage in hate online more or less likely to act on it than those who engage in person? Are these interactions compelling them to use their voice off-line?
  - khazhoux 4y ago
    Is there any evidence he was specifically influenced and motivated by online rhetoric?
    - sarlalian 4y ago
      Yes
    - hackerlight 4y ago
      That's very common. There are a number of mass shooters in the US that targeted minorities who explicitly say in their manifesto or interrogation tape, that they were radicalized in online forums, and not offline.
- mensetmanusman 4y ago
luxuryballs 4y ago
I really don’t think Kanye is mentally ill or anti-Semitic, people are just claiming both or either of those as a way of “poisoning the well” about what he’s actually saying, check out this recent interview with ex-CNN Cuomo: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQwaOfBb-s8 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQwaOfBb-s8
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- partiallypro 4y ago
  He's definitely mentally ill, he has admitted so himself. He also seems to basically cites a lot of things that Black Israelites and Farrakhan say/believe, who are openly anti-Semitic.
- dleslie 4y ago
  Ok, I bit. At 6:50 he explicitly decides to "call out" all Jewish people, and makes a claim that he's a victim of their behaviour. > "And what I'm doing, I'm calling out the Jewish community as a whole to say. People say to me, all, we grew up on Ye. Talk to your brother, ask him why is Ye upset? Everybody, all they [the Jewish Community] want to do is silence and shoot the messenger." That's plainly antisemitism.
  - luxuryballs 4y ago
    At the end of the interview he clarifies what he meant, he’s frustrated with apparent nepotism within an industry. I would be shocked if he claimed that he had a problem with a randomly chosen person who happened to be Jewish, it doesn’t make sense.
    - dleslie 4y ago
      This is fairly clear to me, I don't need to hear his later equivocations: > And what I'm doing, I'm calling out the Jewish community as a whole ... Imagine calling out an entire ethnicity for your woes, and being surprised that people find that offensive.
pclmulqdq 4y ago
I'm not sure most people here have seen the corner of Twitter known as "black Twitter." This is the part of Twitter where people (most of them from racial minorities) discuss things like "the Jews are keeping minorities poor," and "abortion is racist eugenics." I don't know how they don't all get banned, but they somehow have a very vibrant community. The level of antisemitism that Kanye (no, I will not call him "Ye") posted is not beyond the pale for people in black Twitter. I'm not sure he ever expected it to go this viral or get this much backlash.
- partiallypro 4y ago
  Anti-Semitism and anti-Asian views are pretty popular in the black community (I can't say to what degree but high enough that it shows up in hate crime stats), just as much as it exists in the white community. It gets swept under the rug and never really addressed; I've even seen that the idea that minorities can't be racist (even towards other minorities) being actively perpetuated on social media. I think that should change. Kanye is a big voice, but he's hardly a lone voice.
  - augustuspolius 4y ago
    If only we could all agree that the idea that only one race can be bigoted and racist is in itself racist.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    In my experience, anti-Asian views among black people and anti-black views among Asian people are more common than either among white people.
- bt4u 4y ago
space_fountain 4y ago
Isn't this just a long way to saying you think this is the right decision, but doesn't change the fact that it was arbitrary? Except I'm not even sure the decision actually happened. There still aren't any recent posts from them. You might need to wait a bit to know
concinds 4y ago
> Then, there are things like the Taliban, Russia, China, etc which have at times actively cheered on social media about the death of Americans or an American defeat Soleimani. He helped the U.S. fight the Taliban. The U.S. later killed him in "self-defense" (no, really, that's what the U.S. Ambassador to the UN said). Scholars and the UN said the assassination was illegal. Do people who cheered his death deserve a ban? That's not a trick question or whataboutism. At an international scale, principles have to be rigorously and fairly applied.
throwawayacc2 4y ago
> All that said, I hope Trump is never allowed back Asking honestly, why? I am genuinely curious to understand the reasoning behind this line of thinking.

pbreit 4y ago

"I hope Trump is never allowed back," Why?

bitdestroyer 4y ago
gestures broadly
sg47 4y ago
- base698 4y ago
  If democracy got you Trump why would more democracy be the solution?
  - khuey 4y ago
    Democracy didn't get us Trump. The Electoral College got us Trump.
    - partiallypro 4y ago
      The electoral college is still democratic. You're confusing direct democracy with democracy in general. The US is a Republic, which is democratic with general safeguards to prevent mob rule. I can't stand Trump but this is and always will be such a weak argument. If you can control the Senate you can win the electoral college and both parties have done so in the past 20 years back and forth very consistently. Trump would have lost to basically any other candidate, the Democrats have only themselves to blame.
      - tomrod 4y ago
        > You're confusing direct democracy with democracy in general. No, you're confusing semantics. A Wyoming voter's vote counts several times more than a California's vote for the same position. Land borders shouldn't change your vote, that's _anti_-democratic and in favor of an unequal distribution of voting rights. We should call a spade a spade, and here the spade of the electoral college is clearly _not_ democracy when we no longer have to send state delegates across the barren frontier. You can toot the representative republic horn all you want, which is what the system is, but it is in error to call the existing system democratic or a democracy _until_ the electoral college is gone. It should be. It serves no purpose other than to suppress what the majority of the people want. Likewise for state-specific regulations for cross-union office, like for President. Do what you want for your own state representation (e.g. senator, governor) but the President should be the one person actually elected by a majority without shenanigans, whereas none is today.
    - 4y ago

jonny_eh 4y ago

"he's just a mentally ill person" That has very large influence and is spreading and inspiring hate [1]. Mentally ill or not, he's causing real-world damage. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/banner-kanye-right-los-angeles-freeway-antisemtic-group-rcna53653 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/banner-kanye-right-los-...

robertlagrant 4y ago
The premise of speech is damaging, unless it's slander / libel, is I think the main thing Elon Musk wants to change at Twitter.
- floober 4y ago
  What about incitement to violence?
  - jokethrowaway 4y ago
    That's already illegal, report it to the police
    - pixl97 4y ago
      "Some guy in Russia told all the white men to rise up and kill all the jews and blacks" The police "again, that's the 23rd time today" This kinda breaks down at the global scale. I can call for violent acts at your front door from a continent away with impunity.
      - robertlagrant 4y ago
        The main issue is violent acts, not the call for them. Whoever does something violent will not do so with impunity.
        pixl97 4y ago
        See, when you live a privileged and safe life these are some of the lies you believe. You are protected by your position in wealth, race, and maybe location. You're not black, or Jewish, or a unionist, and its all a big surprise when the angry mob does come for you. You yell "this is against the law!" And then only realize the person posting the hateful redeoric online was the officer that should be protecting you. The fascists call for violence is always a joke to them, until the moment it is not.

slg 4y ago

>Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. Twitter banned the Babylon Bee for targeting a random and rather anonymous bureaucrat that likely isn't among the 1000 most powerful people in government in the US for the sole purpose that she is trans. This targeting by the Babylon Bee and other conservative media has led to her getting death threats. Being a satire site doesn't mean we can laugh off all their behavior as a joke. Their behavior was a part of a harassment campaign against someone who is largely a private citizen in this instance. Stopping that doesn't seem like a mistake to me.

partiallypro 4y ago
The piece satirized the confusion between sex and gender. It has only been very, very recently that we have gone from "gender is a social construct" to "sex is a social construct." It's still a highly debated topic and well within the public sphere of debate. Also, this person was a public official and was in the news from general news outlets (named Woman of the Year) which puts them well within the public realm of ridicule, even if you or I don't agree with it. If the piece had advocated physical harm that would be much much different.
- mbesto 4y ago
  > It has only been very, very recently that we have gone from "gender is a social construct" to "sex is a social construct." What? Since when is sex a social construct?
  - jl6 4y ago
    Some people believe sex is a spectrum, or that it can be changed, but it’s super-fringe and mostly reflects ignorance of the difference between sex and gender rather than being a serious philosophical position.
    - searealist 4y ago

DoctorNick 4y ago

> Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. They didn’t even make a joke. They just called trans woman a man. It was hate speech, pure and simple. I am very afraid for the future of twitter now. Hate speech is going to run rampant on that platform now.

vdnkh 4y ago
Not to mention that the person who attacked Pelosi's husband with a hammer was also posting transphobic crap (along with a lot of other right-wing garbage). Hate online definitely has real world impact.
- gffrd 4y ago
  Hate anywhere has real world impact. There’s a lot of hate in the history books, 99% of it predating the internet. Are those that engage in hate online more or less likely to act on it than those who engage in person? Are these interactions compelling them to use their voice off-line?
- khazhoux 4y ago
  Is there any evidence he was specifically influenced and motivated by online rhetoric?
  - sarlalian 4y ago
    Yes
  - hackerlight 4y ago
    That's very common. There are a number of mass shooters in the US that targeted minorities who explicitly say in their manifesto or interrogation tape, that they were radicalized in online forums, and not offline.
mensetmanusman 4y ago

luxuryballs 4y ago

I really don’t think Kanye is mentally ill or anti-Semitic, people are just claiming both or either of those as a way of “poisoning the well” about what he’s actually saying, check out this recent interview with ex-CNN Cuomo: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQwaOfBb-s8 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQwaOfBb-s8

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
partiallypro 4y ago
He's definitely mentally ill, he has admitted so himself. He also seems to basically cites a lot of things that Black Israelites and Farrakhan say/believe, who are openly anti-Semitic.
dleslie 4y ago
Ok, I bit. At 6:50 he explicitly decides to "call out" all Jewish people, and makes a claim that he's a victim of their behaviour. > "And what I'm doing, I'm calling out the Jewish community as a whole to say. People say to me, all, we grew up on Ye. Talk to your brother, ask him why is Ye upset? Everybody, all they [the Jewish Community] want to do is silence and shoot the messenger." That's plainly antisemitism.
- luxuryballs 4y ago
  At the end of the interview he clarifies what he meant, he’s frustrated with apparent nepotism within an industry. I would be shocked if he claimed that he had a problem with a randomly chosen person who happened to be Jewish, it doesn’t make sense.
  - dleslie 4y ago
    This is fairly clear to me, I don't need to hear his later equivocations: > And what I'm doing, I'm calling out the Jewish community as a whole ... Imagine calling out an entire ethnicity for your woes, and being surprised that people find that offensive.

pclmulqdq 4y ago

I'm not sure most people here have seen the corner of Twitter known as "black Twitter." This is the part of Twitter where people (most of them from racial minorities) discuss things like "the Jews are keeping minorities poor," and "abortion is racist eugenics." I don't know how they don't all get banned, but they somehow have a very vibrant community. The level of antisemitism that Kanye (no, I will not call him "Ye") posted is not beyond the pale for people in black Twitter. I'm not sure he ever expected it to go this viral or get this much backlash.

partiallypro 4y ago
Anti-Semitism and anti-Asian views are pretty popular in the black community (I can't say to what degree but high enough that it shows up in hate crime stats), just as much as it exists in the white community. It gets swept under the rug and never really addressed; I've even seen that the idea that minorities can't be racist (even towards other minorities) being actively perpetuated on social media. I think that should change. Kanye is a big voice, but he's hardly a lone voice.
- augustuspolius 4y ago
  If only we could all agree that the idea that only one race can be bigoted and racist is in itself racist.
- rayiner 4y ago
  In my experience, anti-Asian views among black people and anti-black views among Asian people are more common than either among white people.
bt4u 4y ago

space_fountain 4y ago

Isn't this just a long way to saying you think this is the right decision, but doesn't change the fact that it was arbitrary? Except I'm not even sure the decision actually happened. There still aren't any recent posts from them. You might need to wait a bit to know

concinds 4y ago

> Then, there are things like the Taliban, Russia, China, etc which have at times actively cheered on social media about the death of Americans or an American defeat Soleimani. He helped the U.S. fight the Taliban. The U.S. later killed him in "self-defense" (no, really, that's what the U.S. Ambassador to the UN said). Scholars and the UN said the assassination was illegal. Do people who cheered his death deserve a ban? That's not a trick question or whataboutism. At an international scale, principles have to be rigorously and fairly applied.

throwawayacc2 4y ago

> All that said, I hope Trump is never allowed back Asking honestly, why? I am genuinely curious to understand the reasoning behind this line of thinking.