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

71–80 of 110 posts

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#71

Post by InitialLastName »

frou_dh wrote: post #13
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…

> 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". I've always found that to be a trite self-aggrandising phrase (especially in its "to the death" variant). How many of the people who have repeated that, actually stick by it long term? Gotta be microscopic.

Especially given that said phrase was written by a Frenchman and popularized by an Englishwoman.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#72

Post by dingaling »

teh_klev wrote: post #48
sn41 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearchannel, which controlled most FM channels, infamously stopped playing John Lennon's "Imagine" after Sep 11 2001. So this is not new. In the absence of popular govt. media and channels, this does form de facto censorship in the US. The usual explanation I have heard is that free speech is limited to tge govt. not able to arrest you for criticising it. It does not apply to private parties. I think de facto censor…

> Clearchannel, which controlled most FM channels, infamously stopped playing John Lennon's "Imagine" after Sep 11 2001 This snopes article provides some background about what happened there: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/radio-radio/

So songs weren't banned, they were deemed inappropriate to play.

Another example of Snopes proudly declaring FALSE when PARTIALLY TRUE would be more appropriate.

Ah the modern Web, where even the 'fact-checkers' play the spin game.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#73

Post by poisonborz »

loriverkutya wrote: post #59
poisonborz wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of people only access these distribution platforms. The "they still have a website" argument equals to "in a dictatorship, you still have a home and you can say anything between its walls, people can come to you and listen". The internet is / should be much more than that. I always found "disapproval by removal/banning" to be absurd. The true way of them not gaining ground is by educating people. Yes, it…

You never lived in a dictatorship, do you? If people comes to your home and you say something against the "system", they will come and take you, the people who were listening to you and probably your family too. And you are probably not coming back. I really wondering, how would you educate somebody who is shouting and threatening other people. Also, can you imagine how you would feel, if your child was killed in a s…

There are many forms of dictatorships. The stalinist police state you allude to is just one, very outdated variant. It was easy to hate it, and thus it didn't live long. Far more dangerous forms are emerging now.

It's not just him you should educate. It's more about the people who listen to him. As for shouting lies: is it a better alternative to silence that man because you are right? On one hand, argue back, and accept that he has a voice even if it hurts you, on the other, it's the task of all the people standing around to dismiss and ignore and that guy.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#74

Post by Max_Mustermann »

dingaling wrote: post #72
teh_klev wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Clearchannel, which controlled most FM channels, infamously stopped playing John Lennon's "Imagine" after Sep 11 2001 This snopes article provides some background about what happened there: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/radio-radio/

So songs weren't banned, they were deemed inappropriate to play. Another example of Snopes proudly declaring FALSE when PARTIALLY TRUE would be more appropriate. Ah the modern Web, where even the 'fact-checkers' play the spin game.

"Radio personnel were still free to make their own programming decisions, and the list was merely intended as helpful advisory information."

How does that make a "ban" partially true?

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#75

Post by berbec »

beaconstudios wrote: post #55
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.

so then those people should be banned. A public individual cannot be held responsible for the actions of their followers unless they called for those actions to be taken.

So for example "tweeted a link to a video calling for supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against media"?

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#76

Post by berbec »

happytoexplain wrote: post #67
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…

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.

100%

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#77

Post by beaconstudios »

berbec wrote: post #75
beaconstudios wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so then those people should be banned. A public individual cannot be held responsible for the actions of their followers unless they called for those actions to be taken.

So for example "tweeted a link to a video calling for supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against media"?

I'd have to see the video myself - I'll probably look it up later in order to have an informed opinion. Because it could be meant in many ways, and my suspicion is that it was intended in a metaphorical way rather than literally calling for his followers to shoot up some offices.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#78

Post by berbec »

teamk wrote: post #6

Its pretty insane that public businesses are forbidden from discrimination on most grounds (political views, religious views, etc) of who it employs, or who can enter their business, but its perfectly fine for FB, Google, Apple, Twitter, etc., to completely control the content of the conversation on their platforms. It doesn't make sense that as a baker I can be forced to bake gay wedding cakes, or as a Restaurant ow…

The baker won his case at the SCOTUS. [1]

Is being allowed to reenact Jim Crow something you really don't understand why you cant do?

1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colo...

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#79

Post by dragonwriter »

pjc50 wrote: post #3

"The New York Times reports that Jones tweeted a link to a video calling for supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against media and others" Turns out that there is a limit, and it's making really overt death threats. I'm surprised he didn't get banned over the "Democrats are going to have a revolution" stuff. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2018/07...

> Turns out that there is a limit, and it's making really overt death threats

That's inciting or soliciting violence, not a death threat.

Re: Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for Seven Days Over Tweet

#80

Post by sparkzilla »

happytoexplain wrote: post #67
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…

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.

Tell that to the Founding Fathers.
Post reply on HN