Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 110 posts

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#61

Post by eej71 »

beberlei wrote: post #21
skrebbel wrote: post #2

I'm curious about how this is happening in America, of all places. As a European, I've always wondered (with a certain hint of jealousy, I might add) at the USA's absolute freedom of speech. People like the Westboro Baptist Church would've certainly been blocked from protesting here in the Netherlands. At the same time, it's now companies that are very American, both by origin and by culture, that are (letting themse…

But the absolute freedom of speech is just from prosecution of the government (correct me if I am wrong). private parties can always deny you their platform to be used for hatemongering or anything else really.

Agreed. I think this is an important distinction that seems to get lost in some of the conversation. There is a fundamental distinction to be had between the government forbidding you from speech versus a private individual or corporation from excluding you from their platform.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#62

Post by nasoieu »

teh_klev wrote: post #54
nasoieu wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Eastern) Europe has also experienced what happens when communists are in charge, yet communists are not being persecuted in any way, while fascists or nazis are. Something else is going on. Case in point: this comment is being downvoted without any explanation.

> this comment is being downvoted without any explanation https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading."

I am not complaining about it, but I think it's relevant to the point: oppression of certain opinions. Otherwise I wouldn't have mentioned it.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#63

Post by beaconstudios »

codemusings wrote: post #52
ramblerman wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are completely misunderstanding his point. He is saying why is it OK for a small business to be forced to accommodate something that may be against their belief system. But the biggest corporations, who are also managing our online discourse, can pick and choose what they like.

But he's insinuating that people like Alex Jones should be protected by freedom of speech as if their fucked up ideads are some sort of alternative view that's just not for everyone. This is a form of gaslighting that tries to establish credibility for extremists that they don't have.

> But he's insinuating that people like Alex Jones should be protected by freedom of speech as if their fucked up ideads are some sort of alternative view that's just not for everyone.

That is the case. In my opinion he's a hilarious nutcase, but just because you find his views offensive does not mean his speech is now illegitimate. The whole point of freedom of speech is to allow the airing of controversial opinions, even if that means you end up with professional trolls calling tragedies a hoax. Any time you make a "freedom of speech doesn't apply to opinion X" argument, you are actively arguing against freedom of speech.

> This is a form of gaslighting that tries to establish credibility for extremists that they don't have.

What does this even mean? Having a different opinion is not gaslighting and to suggest that it is, is to trivialise a form of psychological abuse.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#64

Post by boomlinde »

skrebbel wrote: post #2

I'm curious about how this is happening in America, of all places. As a European, I've always wondered (with a certain hint of jealousy, I might add) at the USA's absolute freedom of speech. People like the Westboro Baptist Church would've certainly been blocked from protesting here in the Netherlands. At the same time, it's now companies that are very American, both by origin and by culture, that are (letting themse…

> I'm curious about how this is happening in America, of all places.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean that any private entity has to facilitate it. In the US it means that the government can't instate laws that limit free speech, for what may be a broader definition of what is considered legitimate expressions thereof than you'd find in a typical European country applying the same principles.

> This strikes me as an odd paradox, coming from a country where people get taught from primary school onward to "disagree with what you say but fight for your right to say it".

Let's say that you throw a party. You invite friends and acquaintances to use your property. After a few hours, everyone is drunk and someone you don't really know well starts shouting racial slurs. You feel uncomfortable about it. Your guests feel uncomfortable about it. Would you fight for his right to use your property as a platform for his ramblings? He's ruining the party and your own reputation as a host is at stake. Your moral standards are being questioned. You would not be limiting his right to say anything by throwing him out. If nothing else he can go home and shout at a mirror.

That's the kind of situation you have with Facebook/Twitter/Google. They invite people to use their property, on their terms. If they don't like you, they'll kick you out. Even if they don't care, they might kick you out to save face. It's not paradoxical; it's very much in line with American culture: everyone should have the right to choose how to represent themselves and how to use their property. Get off my land! Trespassers will be shot!

> I wonder where all this is going to lead, especially since these few companies control so much of global information flow.

Here I think you pinpoint the problem exactly. This problem doesn't only concern censorship but how these companies treat and disseminate information overall. If public debate is largely controlled by private, poorly unregulated organizations, democracy takes a hit. Maybe tighter regulation of entities that deal with so much communication is called for. I think GDPR is a step in the right direction. Destroy the economic incentives to facilitate so much communication.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#65

Post by krapp »

sparkzilla wrote: post #56
kylesellas wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for freedom of speech even if that speech includes ideas I vehemently disagree with (even hate speech). However, when speech incites physical violence and can be viewed as a legitimate threat, then it needs to be shut down. Parents of children who were lost during Sandy Hook received physical threats and death threats because of Jones' comments. That's the line where free speech should be censored.

When people say "I'm all for freedom of speech, but..." it means they aren't actually for freedom of speech at all. In your case it seems you are willing to curtail a broadcaster's speech because of your arbitrary rule that some of that person's followers may have threatened violence or sent death threats. Alex Jones has indulged in conspiracy theories, but as far as I know he has not called for violence or anyone's…

>In your case it seems you are willing to curtail a broadcaster's speech because of your arbitrary rule that some of that person's followers may have threatened violence or sent death threats.

To be fair, that's not an "arbitrary rule" that kylesellas just made up. Censorship of speech which threatens or advocates violence is commonly accepted as a limitation to free speech necessary for maintaining civil society, and the premise is codified in law throughout the world.

>If your standard was applied consistently then then there would be no media.

The fact that the standard exists and that media also exists would imply that your definition of 'consistent application' isn't relevant.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#66

Post by shf123 »

kylesellas wrote: post #37
skrebbel wrote: post #2

I'm curious about how this is happening in America, of all places. As a European, I've always wondered (with a certain hint of jealousy, I might add) at the USA's absolute freedom of speech. People like the Westboro Baptist Church would've certainly been blocked from protesting here in the Netherlands. At the same time, it's now companies that are very American, both by origin and by culture, that are (letting themse…

I'm all for freedom of speech even if that speech includes ideas I vehemently disagree with (even hate speech). However, when speech incites physical violence and can be viewed as a legitimate threat, then it needs to be shut down. Parents of children who were lost during Sandy Hook received physical threats and death threats because of Jones' comments. That's the line where free speech should be censored.

So Sandy Hook is the reason we can't have guns and we can't have free speech? Yet you expect me to believe its not a deep state psy-op?

Which it was, and if you workaholics could spare two hours of your life and look into it, you would come to the same conclusion.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#67

Post by happytoexplain »

sparkzilla wrote: post #56
kylesellas wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for freedom of speech even if that speech includes ideas I vehemently disagree with (even hate speech). However, when speech incites physical violence and can be viewed as a legitimate threat, then it needs to be shut down. Parents of children who were lost during Sandy Hook received physical threats and death threats because of Jones' comments. That's the line where free speech should be censored.

When people say "I'm all for freedom of speech, but..." it means they aren't actually for freedom of speech at all. In your case it seems you are willing to curtail a broadcaster's speech because of your arbitrary rule that some of that person's followers may have threatened violence or sent death threats. Alex Jones has indulged in conspiracy theories, but as far as I know he has not called for violence or anyone's…

When people say "I'm all for freedom of speech, but..." it means they aren't actually for freedom of speech at all.

Absolutism is poison.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#68

Post by sparkzilla »

krapp wrote: post #65
sparkzilla wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people say "I'm all for freedom of speech, but..." it means they aren't actually for freedom of speech at all. In your case it seems you are willing to curtail a broadcaster's speech because of your arbitrary rule that some of that person's followers may have threatened violence or sent death threats. Alex Jones has indulged in conspiracy theories, but as far as I know he has not called for violence or anyone's…

>In your case it seems you are willing to curtail a broadcaster's speech because of your arbitrary rule that some of that person's followers may have threatened violence or sent death threats. To be fair, that's not an "arbitrary rule" that kylesellas just made up. Censorship of speech which threatens or advocates violence is commonly accepted as a limitation to free speech necessary for maintaining civil society, an…

There is no legal standard by which a broadcaster who doesn't incite violence can be held accountable by their followers who commit or threaten violence.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#69

Post by creaghpatr »

boomlinde wrote: post #64
skrebbel wrote: post #2

I'm curious about how this is happening in America, of all places. As a European, I've always wondered (with a certain hint of jealousy, I might add) at the USA's absolute freedom of speech. People like the Westboro Baptist Church would've certainly been blocked from protesting here in the Netherlands. At the same time, it's now companies that are very American, both by origin and by culture, that are (letting themse…

> I'm curious about how this is happening in America, of all places. Freedom of speech doesn't mean that any private entity has to facilitate it. In the US it means that the government can't instate laws that limit free speech, for what may be a broader definition of what is considered legitimate expressions thereof than you'd find in a typical European country applying the same principles. > This strikes me as an od…

It will be interesting when he gets banned from AirBnB, Uber, Lyft, etc in solidarity. We already know AirBnB will discriminate against you if you harbor hate speech views even if they weren’t expressed on their platform.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#70

Post by Rjevski »

Now if only they'd do the same for spam, scams, malware, etc... you know, the actual stuff that hurts the platform.

I don't support Infowars but I'd take it any way over "Hai this is @EloanMusk2499 and I am giving out free cryptocurrency - just click this link or send 1BTC to this address and you'll get 10BTC in exchange!!!".

Post reply on HN