Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Says Trump Not Immune From Getting Kicked Off (politico.com)
Twitter legal and policy chief Vijaya Gadde told Politico in an interview that President Donald Trump isn't immune from being kicked off the platform if his tweets cross a line with abusive behavior. "The social media company's rules against vitriolic tweets offer leeway for world leaders whose statements are newsworthy, but that 'is not a blanket exception for the president or anyone else,'" reports Politico. From the report: Trump regularly uses Twitter to heap abuse on his perceived enemies and at times raise the specter of violence, such as when he tweeted last year that if North Korean leaders continued with their rhetoric at the time, "they won't be around much longer!" Critics say the tweets violate Twitter's terms of service and warrant punitive action. Dorsey, who's due to testify before two congressional committees Wednesday about his company's content practices, said he receives notifications on his phone for Trump's Twitter account. But asked if he would weigh in personally to remove Trump from the platform, he declined to get into specifics.
"We have to balance it with the context that it's in," he said. "So my role is to ask questions and make sure we're being impartial, and we're upholding consistently our terms of service, including public interest." Amid controversy over Trump's tweeting back in January, Twitter posted to its corporate blog an unsigned explanation of its thinking around "world leaders" -- without calling out Trump by name. It said blocking such leaders or removing their tweets "would hide important information people should be able to see and debate." Dorsey tweeted the policy, saying "we want to share our stance."
"We have to balance it with the context that it's in," he said. "So my role is to ask questions and make sure we're being impartial, and we're upholding consistently our terms of service, including public interest." Amid controversy over Trump's tweeting back in January, Twitter posted to its corporate blog an unsigned explanation of its thinking around "world leaders" -- without calling out Trump by name. It said blocking such leaders or removing their tweets "would hide important information people should be able to see and debate." Dorsey tweeted the policy, saying "we want to share our stance."
So, if you threaten to destroy an entire nation or people, and you don't have the ability to carry out your threat, you get booted off Twitter. But if you make the threat and actually have a credible possibility of making it happen, then it's newsworthy and they leave it on.
Translation: We're scared of Trump and don't want to have to take action unless it's for something that no one will criticize us for.
Cowards.
Make a policy and stick to it, or don't have one.
Technically, he is not. They could kick him if they really wanted too. Removing him would be the worse thing they could possibly do. Probably the business equivalent of corporate suicide. Some Republicans are already barking about how much the tech. giants Twitter, Google, and Facebook control they have over speech. Limiting a sitting republican presidents speech on their platform might be enough to push them over the edge and have congress start regulating speech on internet platform.
I don't think any of us, pro trump or anti-trump, want that bunch of baboons attempting to police what we can say online. As much as we find Trumps tweets annoying, our best bet is just to ride this out. It will be over in a few years.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
How does Elon Musk not get kicked off for calling a guy a pedophile and a "child rapist"? What is the standard? Why isn't it being enforced?
The standard? https://help.twitter.com/en/ru...
1. No targeted harassment (i.e. repeated behavior that causes alarm/annoyance/distress). I think there have been a total of two tweets from Elon Musk in this case, so it hardly seems repeated.
2. No unwanted sexual advances. This clearly wasn't.
3. No promoting violence on the basis of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, religion, age, disability. Musk wasn't promoting violence nor was this one of the protected categories.
4. No hateful display names or profile images.
Elon Musk's tweets clearly haven't broken the Twitter rules. It should be stressed that "11001000100 think the tweets shouldn't have been made" and indeed "most people think the tweets shouldn't have been made" are both very different from "violate the standard"
There was a recent hilarious case of twitter user bluecheckwatch who literally went through verified twitter users with far left views, and just post screenshots of their open hate speech, twitter took swift action...
By banning the user bluecheckwatch. All the racist, sexist hatred user posted evidence of is obviously still allowed, because it's targeting the correct untermensch, in the name of correct ubermensch. In modern progressive lingvo, we call it "fair and balanced".
Twitter is the land of double standards. If you're "in with the group" there's no problem at all. Note how very few blue checkmarked jackasses that spew racism or bigotry get any type of warning or punishment. People who point this out? Banned. Your local antifa group advocating for violence, or people supporting and calling for violence under the banner? Not banned. Group of guys making in-jokes and posing memes? Banned.
Om, nomnomnom...