Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Ignites Censorship Debate After Removal Of Parody Putin Account (thenextweb.com)
Twitter has suspended at least five popular anti-Kremlin Twitter accounts on its microblogging social network. The move has angered fans of the accounts and reignited the speculation on censorship on the platform. One such account parodied Russia President Vladimir Putin. The Next Web reports that some of the accounts have been brought back to function amid criticism from their respective fans. Parody accounts have resided in the gray area ever since the early days of Twitter. The social network's official ToS permits users to run a parody account of a celebrity provided they explicitly mention on their profile that it's a fake account. From the report: After their removal, social media users took two Twitter to voice their displeasure with the hashtag #NoGulagForDarthPutinKGB -- a reference to the repressive Soviet state -- and it's seemingly worked, as both accounts are back today. Of course, for how long, and why they were removed in the first place are questions that remain unanswered.
It isn't censorship. Censorship is being forced to remove things.
This is just, ummm, pre-removal before things gets that far.
If you're suffering the chilling effects of not sharing media because you think you might get in trouble, that's a second-order effect of censorship.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Why the fuck do people rely on centralised private speech platforms to make political speech?
Because speech that nobody hears is pretty much useless and twitter and facebook are where the readers are these days. Platforms for widely disseminated speech have been private for centuries. Newspapers, TV, radio, etc are all centralized and privately owned in most cases and it's generally worked just fine as long as there was more than one publisher. In fact you don't actually want your publishers to be owned by the government if you actually care about free speech.
In a capitalistic system
Thats cute, you still think 'the system' matters.
Let me give you a hint:
Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Slavery, whatever you want, doesn't matter, its ALL A HUMAN SYSTEM. Governed by human emotions and human greed.
ALL OF THOSE SYSTEMS RESULT IN THE PEOPLE IN POWER CONTROLLING THE PEOPLE NOT IN POWER AND DRAWING RESOURCES AWAY FROM THEM.
ALL OF THEM ARE CORRUPT because THE PEOPLE RUNNING THEM ARE CORRUPT, BE NATURE.
The people who aren't corrupt and would do it properly ... want absolutely nothing to do with the rat bastards who naturally gravitate towards controlling others, I'm sorry, 'leading' others.
When you start arguing about which 'system' is better, you've already lost because you've proven you don't understand how any of them actually work outside of a text book.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Don't you understand that there is no right to be heard? Nobody owes you a platform.
You are welcome on my lawn.
"When was the last time you stopped yourself from saying something you believed to be true for fear of being punished or criticized for saying it? If you live in America, it probably hasn't been long."
-- Tucker Carlson
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Lot of rude words in your post and next to none arguments. If it is not a public service, owner can public/delete posts as he wants. He must obey the law (e.g. not to pretend to be someone else, etc.). But he has zero duty to voice your opinion.
"When was the last time you stopped yourself from saying something you believed to be true for fear of being punished or criticized for saying it? If you live in America, it probably hasn't been long."
Emphasis mine. Criticism is free speech. Interesting how so-called free speech supportes are against it when it comes to people using free speech in a way they don't like.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
There is no downside to everyone saying what they want when they want, true or false.
Complete and demonstrable bullshit. People can be injured by words. Physically, economically, emotionally and and sometimes permanently. There is a reason shouting fire in a crowded theater is illegal. Inciting a riot can get people killed. Fraudulent speech can hurt people economically. Slander and libel can ruin someone's life. Etc. Free speech doesn't remain free for long if the powerful or malicious can injure others without consequences by what they say. It's no different than your right to swing your fist ends at my chin. Free speech is not the same thing as speech without limits and never has been.