Live data from Hacker News

Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

thedailybeast.com

21–30 of 153 posts

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#21
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem tame, but a quick search suggests it may be an anti-semitic dog whistle.

It seems like every comment by someone the left doesn’t like is a kind of dog whistle.

At least the grandparent comment had the decency to generalize about a smaller, more ideologically narrow group of people than "the right" or "the left".

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#22
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like every comment by someone the left doesn’t like is a kind of dog whistle.

Doesn't mean they're wrong. There's a reason they don't like those words/phrases.

> Doesn't mean they're wrong.

If you have watched Alex Jones before you will know he happily speaks his mind and is not afraid to come across as offensive or crazy.

It is not in his character to hide secret meanings in his content.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#23
post #7

Honestly, "Those are the eyes of a rat" is a fairly tame insult compared to the kind of toxic drivel Jones usually says, and seems like weak grounds for termination. He should've been kicked off long ago, but I fear that having this particular example be the "final straw" is only going to strengthen the alt-right's persecution complex.

It does seem tame, but a quick search suggests it may be an anti-semitic dog whistle.

Some insults are simply worse depending on who they are targeting. It is the difference between calling GW Bush a monkey because he occasionally looked like a monkey and Obama being called a monkey as a racial slur. The former is a childish insult that is easy to ignore. The latter is a form of bigotry that shouldn't be tolerated.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#24
post #7

Honestly, "Those are the eyes of a rat" is a fairly tame insult compared to the kind of toxic drivel Jones usually says, and seems like weak grounds for termination. He should've been kicked off long ago, but I fear that having this particular example be the "final straw" is only going to strengthen the alt-right's persecution complex.

It does seem tame, but a quick search suggests it may be an anti-semitic dog whistle.

Much of the point of a dog whistle (as I understand it) is plausible deniability. The parent comment stands: shutting it down over something that "may mean something" -- even though with context you may be quite sure -- is a bad look.

The next step is simply to point at the myriad of other times anyone called someone a rat on Twitter and Twitter is left to defend a position of shutting people down over what they were thinking when they wrote something.

They should have used one of the many better reasons they had for this this case.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#25
post #7

Honestly, "Those are the eyes of a rat" is a fairly tame insult compared to the kind of toxic drivel Jones usually says, and seems like weak grounds for termination. He should've been kicked off long ago, but I fear that having this particular example be the "final straw" is only going to strengthen the alt-right's persecution complex.

It does seem tame, but a quick search suggests it may be an anti-semitic dog whistle.

Is Oliver Darcy Jewish?

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#26

> “Those are the eyes of a rat,” There's no way they can ban him for saying that yet still claim to enforce the rules equally for all political affiliations. There have been thousands (maybe more) tweets by people with blue verification checkmarks calling Trump an orange oompa loopa and much worse. No one has been banned for that (rightfully so imo). There's been a ton of pressure on Twitter to ban Jones but using th…

There's no way they can ban him for saying that yet still claim to enforce the rules equally for all political affiliations.

It's not the government, they absolutely can ban people for anything they want and they don't have to be consistent about it. There's nothing you can do about this it than deleting your account, complaining about them on the internet, and/or acquiring a seat on their board of directors and effecting change from within. I suppose a hostile takeover of the entire company should be mentioned, too.

Furthermore, "neutrality" is a figment of your imagination.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#27
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't mean they're wrong. There's a reason they don't like those words/phrases.

> Doesn't mean they're wrong. If you have watched Alex Jones before you will know he happily speaks his mind and is not afraid to come across as offensive or crazy. It is not in his character to hide secret meanings in his content.

He was put on notice by Twitter with a week ban. That's the exact circumstance where someone like him would start using coded language to try and avoid a ban while still promoting his ideas. That's the purpose of coded language.

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like every comment by someone the left doesn’t like is a kind of dog whistle.

Ah. the good old: lets criticize a generalization by making a generalization. Always a strong argument :)

Since when does the broadness of an observation or argument have any impact on its validity? Who made up that rule?

Re: Twitter Permanently Bans Alex Jones and Infowars

#30
post #26

> “Those are the eyes of a rat,” There's no way they can ban him for saying that yet still claim to enforce the rules equally for all political affiliations. There have been thousands (maybe more) tweets by people with blue verification checkmarks calling Trump an orange oompa loopa and much worse. No one has been banned for that (rightfully so imo). There's been a ton of pressure on Twitter to ban Jones but using th…

There's no way they can ban him for saying that yet still claim to enforce the rules equally for all political affiliations. It's not the government, they absolutely can ban people for anything they want and they don't have to be consistent about it. There's nothing you can do about this it than deleting your account, complaining about them on the internet, and/or acquiring a seat on their board of directors and effe…

The argument was against their claim to enforce the rules neutrally, not that it's illegal.
Post reply on HN