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

Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 131 posts

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#91

Post by happytoexplain »

yters wrote: post #73
JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What spectrum? he's a conspiracy theorist telling fabrications, he "fits" on the right wing, but no sane conservative would associate with him.

My point is there is a clear bias as to which extremists get banned from Twitter. I'm not saying Alex Jones is representative of the right.

I haven't seen evidence of this personally, so to me it's not "clear", but I also think there's a sparsity of data (these bannings are mostly few, high-profile cases). However, I absolutely do not doubt that it COULD happen, given the chance. Do you have anybody in mind that you would consider his opposite, politically, but comparable in the damaging/far-reaching nature of his rhetoric?

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#92

Post by colordrops »

happytoexplain wrote: post #89
colordrops wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not abusive behavior though. It's just a conspiracy theory.

Since the "abuse" in abusive behavior online is not defined as physical abuse, but rather mental, e.g. harrassment, I don't see how there could be any room for doubt that this horrific, insane lie is abusive to the many people affected.

A double digit percentage of Twitter comments are abusive by that definition.

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#94

Post by alexozer »

craftyguy wrote: post #66
LocalH wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same reasoning that leads to people getting banned from a service for a reason, and then given a cold shoulder and absolutely no information about why . Perhaps this is fine in situations where the banned entity is a malicious actor, but it presumes a zero false-positive rate. My opinion is, if even one person is wrongly punished without recourse (other than rolling the dice with social media) then the wh…

Who, other than you, says that twitter must be just? The world would be a completely different place if companies were required by law to be just.

What makes you think that they said that Twitter must be just? Why not simply should be just? Why would you not want a platform as large and integral to modern open communication to be just?

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#95

Post by mcphage »

modells wrote: post #28

Crossfire, Alex Jones and Gordon Ramsay need their own shouting as a service platform. It sucks for free speech that he got banned because it gives him notoriety and "credibility" in wingnuttery circles. There ought to be other remedies to manipulative behavior for ratings than simply banning.

> Crossfire, Alex Jones and Gordon Ramsay need their own shouting as a service platform.

Jones already has one, but the problem is, not enough people listen to it. So he wants to get on everybody else's shouting platforms as well. He could make more shouting platforms, but... well, "a platform for Alex Jones and Alex Jones wannabes to shout at you" isn't really much of a compelling MVP.

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#96

Post by craftyguy »

alexozer wrote: post #94
craftyguy wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who, other than you, says that twitter must be just? The world would be a completely different place if companies were required by law to be just.

What makes you think that they said that Twitter must be just? Why not simply should be just? Why would you not want a platform as large and integral to modern open communication to be just?

> integral to modern open communication

Why do you assume that it is integral to modern open communication? (hint: it's not, for plain reason that twitter does what's best for twitter)

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#97

Post by boxspam »

Atlantium wrote: post #11
marcrosoft wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"do the right thing" is difficult when you are suppressing free speech on a platform that's supposed to be all about it.

Alex Jones is free to express his speech on his own website as much as he pleases. "Free Speech" is not about forcing a company to host content they don't like. That would be against Twitter's freedoms. Alex Jones will still be heard by his audience.

> Alex Jones will still be heard by his audience.

Current audience. What about a new young audience? What about the part of the audience that wants to listen to him on Twitter?

> That would be against Twitter's freedoms.

I think you should be able to fire your users for being assholes. But I do realize the slippery slope here. I could discriminate on race, political preference, smell, weight, sexuality, age, etc. and that causes me to label someone an asshole.

Now Twitter, the biggest public and digital town square of our future, labels you an asshole, but does not specify exactly why. The global media town crier goes around town telling everyone you are now the new village idiot. Even if you vehemently agree with their decision, this should give you pause: How could such a system be hacked by adversaries/what vulnerabilities are exposed? How much unchecked social/tribal power is held in the hands of the few? What would such a system look like if it is artificially/clumsily converged to a majority opinion ideology chamber? Then, will you still be heard by your audience if you have a dissenting/unpopular/asshole opinion? Not too long ago "homosexuality is not a mental disorder" was an unpopular opinion. Do you trust our current evolution enough to say: "We are there. We can now freeze our morals and views."

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#98

Post by dwaltrip »

yters wrote: post #78
orf wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see it less about the left censoring people and more about a grown man harassing a journalist by hurling abuse at his face for 10 minutes straight (whilst invading his personal space with a camera), and topping it off with a racist anti semitic dog whistle comment about his eyes. The guy being, for lack of a better word, bullied in the video took it exceptionally well. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Yes, the bullying was uncalled for. And what this has done has motivated me to look further into who Alex Jones is, and reversed my opinion back to him being a scumbag. Seems he is only a few ratings away from going full Holocaust denial in his mission to doubt all official accounts of anything.

He's an absolute, frothing-at-the-mouth nut job. It makes me sad how many people listen to him.

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#99

Post by boxspam »

TheDong wrote: post #77
nyolfen wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe you haven’t noticed, but people have been going after hosting companies and payment processors lately to shut down people they find politically disagreeable. we are increasingly less and less free to host our own speech.

> shut down people they find politically disagreeable It's not that. Hate-speech is not political. Racism is not political. Morality is not all that political. Shutting down someone who denies shootings and is abusive to the victim's families and spews racism is not a political move. People should condemn disgusting hate speech regardless of their political affiliation.

I hate how Xi Jinping is running China so strictly. The Russian Apartment Bombings was an inside job. Westerners should have no business in the Middle East.

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#100

Post by 0x4f3759df »

threeseed wrote: post #54
nyolfen wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe you haven’t noticed, but people have been going after hosting companies and payment processors lately to shut down people they find politically disagreeable. we are increasingly less and less free to host our own speech.

Then run your own hosting company and accept money via Bitcoin. You can't just force third party companies to do whatever you want.

I don't see why he can't just terraform Mars and built his own Internet and Twitter there.
Post reply on HN