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

Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#761

Post by tombert »

mjburgess wrote: post #747
dijit wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have laws in the UK that curtail speech like that, "Inciting violence" is a crime. Which I agree with to some extent, you're not innocent of a crime because you convinced a person to harm another, just because you were too cowardly to get your hands dirty yourself. But the US is rather famously not British, so I'm not sure if it's a relevant thing to add to the discussion.

There's plenty of "speech" criminalized in the US: many crimes are just matters of conspiring to X, or fradulently X... which may have been conducted entirely in speech. The relevant kind of speech for "free expression" is that which seeks to express an idea/opinion/belief of the speaker. That isn't criminalised in the UK as far as I'm aware, and would fall under the EHCR protections in any case which are in UK law a…

You could even argue that Copyright law itself, and particularly the DMCA provisions, are a violation of free speech.

Obviously practically this wouldn't be possible, but if I were to write down all binary digits that my blu-ray of John Wick has, give it to a friend, and they wrote those digits down in their computer to watch the movie, that would be illegal for copyright violation.

I'm not arguing that we shouldn't have copyright in any capacity (though I do think that US's model is especially draconian), just giving an example of a curtailment of free speech that isn't really controversial.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#762

Post by anigbrowl »

downerending wrote: post #715
tathougies wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Youre right. Before twitter took this step I was unable to decide whether to read the president's tweets. Every morning I am forced by twitter to read trumps tweets. Thank goodness this is no longer the case. /s

This is the bit I don't get. I regularly ignore the utterances of all sorts of people I'm not interested in hearing from. Is it really that hard?

Given that the president is invested with enormous power and has proved both able and willing to upend others' lives for political ends, pretending that he's just another random e-celeb seems kind of disingenuous.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#763

Post by philwelch »

chooseaname wrote: post #248
umvi wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting That's an extremely literal interpretation of his words. Most people would interpret that phrase to mean "you better think twice before looting because I'm not going to sit idly by and let you do it" but in the form of a vaguely threatening, yet catchy rhyme.

> The phrase was used by Miami's police chief, Walter Headley, in 1967, when he addressed his department's "crackdown on ... slum hoodlums," according to a United Press International article from the time. > Headley, who was chief of police in Miami for 20 years, said that law enforcement was going after “young hoodlums, from 15 to 21, who have taken advantage of the civil rights campaign. ... We don't mind being acc…

There are many ways I would describe Donald Trump, but “deeply knowledgeable about American civil rights history” is not one of them. I can almost certainly guarantee you that Trump’s statement was not intended as an homage or reference to a Miami police chief from the 1960’s.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#764

Post by joshuamorton »

thejynxed wrote: post #685
ken wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Twitter is going to police people, it needs to be across the board. That assumes that all users on Twitter are equal. By Twitter's own rules [1], there are two classes of users. Elected officials are held to a different standard. That's why this tweet is hidden behind a click, rather than removed. That's why Trump hasn't been banned despite repeatedly violating the TOS that he agreed to when he signed up for his…

To be fair, in regard's to Trump's Twitter account, a Federal judge has already ruled that Twitter absolutely may not remove his account, and likewise, he may not block people who insult his spray tan, because it's a de facto public forum for interacting with the POTUS.

> ruled that Twitter absolutely may not remove his account

I just skimmed through that ruling, and couldn't find this. Could you cite where she ruled that twitter couldn't remove his account?

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#765

Post by rz2k »

Thinkx220 wrote: post #655
seaknoll wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This movement is about centuries of unjustness. To me, it is appropriate that the occasional bystander and business is overlooked. That doesn't mean that if you were my sibling, or friend, or business that I wouldn't be entitled to express personal pain. But the magnitude of my pain is nothing next to the pain that's led up to this, and no it wouldn't be appropriate for it to get remotely equal attention. Sure, ideal…

Unfortunately, both you, the media, and the looters keep forgetting the events are, as you said, history.

What does "history" mean? The suffering of innocent bystanders in past riots is history. In a year the innocent bystanders of these riots will be "only history".

Many of the immigrants who have created new businesses in the US have experienced terrible histories themselves, but they have been able to put these behind them, because their antagonists are not in the US.

I don't think historic injustices should be simply ignored, but the problem is even more severe when the systemic abuses your community is experiencing is not only in the past, not only occurring in the moment, but there is realistic prospect that conditions will to improve.

Private companies militarizing police forces never face liability, and sworn, armed officers belong to unions, and neither of those seems on a course to changing.

It is a completely untenable situation for American citizens to be extra-judiciously killed by government employees. Rioting doesn't help, peaceful protests don't help, you can't even respectfully kneel during the national anthem without being treated as though you're rejecting everything about the country. Petitions? Hunger strikes? Self-immolation?

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#766

Post by tunesmith »

dependenttypes wrote: post #752
ikeyany wrote: post #192

People are wondering "How far does this go? How can Twitter say this is not cool, but allow something like violent movies or games? Where's the line?" The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line.

> The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line. Is this supposed to be bad? I actually wish that our own PM had done the same. I am sure that the citizens of a lot of countries that live under the rule of criminal syndicates, looters, and highwaymen would agree. It seems that the US citizens are fine with state mandated violence a…

> Is this supposed to be bad?

Yes.

> I actually wish that our own PM had done the same.

That would be bad.

> I am sure that the citizens of a lot of countries that live under the rule of criminal syndicates, looters, and highwaymen would agree.

They are also bad.

What is better is to have a functional police system that responds proportionately.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#767

Post by RhodesianHunter »

Reedx wrote: post #709
tomp wrote: post #171

This is amazing news, and I hope Twitter adopts this policy for all rules violations. Much better than deleting tweet or banning accounts, this lets people decide what they want to see. (Except for obvious spammers etc. which should probably be banned.) Even better would be if there were user-configurable "lists", whereby you could decide upfront what you want / don't want to see (like many sites do right now with NS…

If we're being honest, Twitter is basically a machine that glorifies violence. It rewards it at the platform and algorithmic level. An endless volume of tweets under every charged trending topic violates these rules, which are being surfaced and promoted by the platform. And it enables mob mentality like nothing we've seen before. Moderation is mostly just theater, especially as long as the platform itself is quite l…

I'd be curious to know a little bit more about what exactly you're referencing here. This does not in any way describe my experience with Twitter, though I understand that's a single anecdote.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#768

Post by wnoise »

barnesto wrote: post #698
seaknoll wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This movement is about centuries of unjustness. To me, it is appropriate that the occasional bystander and business is overlooked. That doesn't mean that if you were my sibling, or friend, or business that I wouldn't be entitled to express personal pain. But the magnitude of my pain is nothing next to the pain that's led up to this, and no it wouldn't be appropriate for it to get remotely equal attention. Sure, ideal…

Where was this movement when Justine Damond was shot in the gut by a black cop in Minneapolis? I don't recall any protests, let alone riots or burning down the city. And if your expression of pain includes looting booze from a liquor store or a TV from Target, what exactly are you trying to say? By the way, those bystanders and local businesses owners are people of color too.

And justice was done in that case. In the next Minneapolis case, Philando Castile, a black man, it wasn't.

Again, the rioting isn't a good thing, but it's understandable.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#769

Post by arcticfox »

fortran77 wrote: post #529
Animats wrote: post #79

Twitter policy: "We start from a position of assuming that people do not intend to violate our Rules. Unless a violation is so egregious that we must immediately suspend an account, we first try to educate people about our Rules and give them a chance to correct their behavior. We show the violator the offending Tweet(s), explain which Rule was broken, and require them to remove the content before they can Tweet agai…

It depends on who and what. And it's the inconsistency that will fuel the critics. They didn't suspend Spike Lee who caused direct harm to a private individual who happened to share a name with an infamous individual: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/spike-lee-settles-twi...

The article you linked to was over 8 years ago at this point - it was years closer to the founding of Twitter than it is to the present day. I don't think that can be considered relevant to their current enforcement regime.

Re: Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

#770

Post by dependenttypes »

tunesmith wrote: post #766
dependenttypes wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The leader of the United States encouraging law enforcement and the military to shoot American citizens for looting, that's the line. Is this supposed to be bad? I actually wish that our own PM had done the same. I am sure that the citizens of a lot of countries that live under the rule of criminal syndicates, looters, and highwaymen would agree. It seems that the US citizens are fine with state mandated violence a…

> Is this supposed to be bad? Yes. > I actually wish that our own PM had done the same. That would be bad. > I am sure that the citizens of a lot of countries that live under the rule of criminal syndicates, looters, and highwaymen would agree. They are also bad. What is better is to have a functional police system that responds proportionately.

Why would that be bad exactly? Anyway, I am glad that you did not have to survive through something like that.

> What is better is to have a functional police system that responds proportionately.

In times of mass-looting? I doubt that even the most functional police system could be able to help.

That being said we are talking about the extremely dysfunctional American police system. I doubt that they can change it into a functional one within an hour. What would you suggest for right now?

Post reply on HN