January 11, 2016

Twitter vs. religious conservatives?

Denyse O'LearyRebel Blogger
 

Readers may recall that Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg promised German Chancellor Angela Merkel he would do something about Facebook groups expressing concern about the way migrants are changing Germany.

The problem is, while some groups might merit expulsion for expressions of hate, once the subject is politicized, we will not likely find even-handed enforcement. Those complaining about anti-Semitism could share some discouraging stories.

It may partly be a question of volume and reach:

There are more anti-Semites in the world than there are anti-migrants in Germany.

And that’s the central difficulty: Enforcing rules against hate speech selectively is worse than not enforcing them at all. Even if honestly meant, it amounts to siding with the group that can produce a bigger, more monotonous volume of hate than even a system like Facebook can keep up with.

Which brings us to Twitter’s effort to power down religious “hate.” Radio host Michael Brown reports at Townhall:

I can’t imagine that anyone thinks we need more incivility and hatred and incitement on social media, and I can understand why Twitter CEO Dick Costolo feels “ashamed” at how poorly his company has handled abusers.

With that in mind, Twitter’s guidelines are understandable, stating, “You may not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease.”

But what exactly does this mean?

As a Canadian long involved in the free speech wars I can tell him what it means:

If someone who has political cachet makes a big to-do about feeling attacked or threatened, their target has committed an offence.

Twitter is a digital medium; no one can reach out from the screen and upset someone’s coffee onto their lap. For that very reason, claims about “violence,” “attack,” or “threat” may be entirely metaphorical, yet potent, especially when the target is not "cool."

For some idea of what to expect, as Brown recounts:

Recently, in an eye-opening Facebook experiment conducted by the Shurat HaDin, Israel Law Center, two Facebook pages were launched simultaneously, one anti-Israeli and the other anti-Palestinian.

Progressively hateful posts were uploaded to each site simultaneously, culminating with calls to kill the Jews on one page and to kill the Palestinians on the other page.

Both pages were then reported to Facebook simultaneously, after which Facebook removed the anti-Palestinian site, finding it to be in violation of Facebook’s community standards, while leaving the anti-Israeli site untouched, since it was not found to be in violation.

Family values groups can expect the same treatment as a matter of course. Mozilla developer and executive Brendan Eich was fired after an IRS employee leaked to gay lobbyists the fact that he had given money to a marriage defense group. Mozilla's reasoning? "Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech."

There was no significant outcry from within the high tech industry at this Orwellian justification.

Groups not protected by political correctness may end up needing new methods of new media communication. But it is early days yet.

 

JOIN TheRebel.media FREE for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

READ Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights --
Ezra Levant’s book about the Canadian Human Rights Commissions, censorship and the Mohammed cartoons was voted "the best political book of the last 25 years."

Toronto bureaucrats have banned a Christian group from singing hymns!
SIGN THE PETITION to fight anti-Christian bigotry at Yonge & Dundas Square.

 

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-01-14 17:32:39 -0500
The findings of the Shurat Hadin centre were so surprising that I went looking for the results.

But I couldn’t find them.

Please do a better job of citations. Like, report the name of the experiment you’re referring to. Then, more people might consider you as real journalists.

Anyways, I found the centre’s reporting of this on Facebook. It could be easily explained by Facebook just not taking the anti-Israel comments as a credible threat.

I mean, really, who has a credible threat against Israel? Meanwhile, we actively bomb many Muslim countries, and clearly can pose a credible threat to them.
The results do not mean that Facebook is anti-semitic. It means that they believe that we pose more of a threat to them than vice versa, and take the threats accordingly.
commented 2016-01-14 04:46:34 -0500
M. Mann…you are an idiot. Straw man argument or what, you clown.
commented 2016-01-12 23:41:26 -0500
Denyse O’Leary,

Maybe this will make it easier for you to understand – if Ezra found out that Brian Lilly was secretly a hard core liberal, gave money to liberal causes and had the opposite view of what The Rebel stands for – there is no way that Ezra could allow Brian to still be part of The Rebel with it’s conservative agenda.

I hope this helps you.
commented 2016-01-12 13:07:12 -0500
To me, this is the critical fact: "Mozilla developer and executive Brendan Eich was fired after an IRS employee leaked to gay lobbyists the fact that he had given money to a marriage defense group. Mozilla’s reasoning? “Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech.”" No one seemed to care that the US government leaked private data with impunity. Nor is “equality” necessary for meaningful speech. Welcome to the world of Big Brother’s technocracy.
commented 2016-01-12 01:32:45 -0500
Michael Mann what about the rights of women not to have to be covered and not be stoned to death for being raped, or for them to not have to go through genital mutilation? Oh yeah you do not care LMAO!
commented 2016-01-12 01:07:03 -0500
Michael Mann thinks the worst mass murderers in history , socialist atheists are some great people, and he thinks Islam is somehow forward while Christianity is backwards in their attitudes, i have not seen Christians throwing gays off of buildings lately. OH SORRY, he did not look when Islamists did that, he needs to live in denial.
commented 2016-01-12 01:04:47 -0500
Gonna be so funny when Michael Mann is turning in gay people to his sharia masters. LMAO!
commented 2016-01-12 01:04:00 -0500
Michael Mann i know you are that stupid, sorry but not everyone has to support LGBT to work for a living, you would have a cow if someone gay were fired for not being Christian , if you hate freedom then do not practice it. We know what happened , you are just a sad bigot. And sorry but it is not hate because someone does not kiss their ass, and do babies not have human rights? And when the hell did you ask everyone at the company if they support gay marriage? You are pathetic.
commented 2016-01-11 20:50:23 -0500
Elton,

Uh, no. Please tell me that you are not this stupid.

He was fired for one reason – Mozilla is a proud LGBT supporter and give money to such causes – that was the company culture and everyone who works there is supportive of that culture. Eich obviously didn’t and Mozilla can’t have someone like that leading the company.
commented 2016-01-11 18:22:04 -0500
Yes Michael. Except we all know this had nothing to do with equality and everything to do with political correctness because if he was a Muslim he would still have his job.
commented 2016-01-11 17:41:13 -0500
Yep and Mozilla were in the right to fire Eich.

You can’t have a company culture of supporting the LGBT and the CEO of that company is against human right for those people. Hate gay people? Don’t work for companies that support the LGBT – including financially.

Unfortunately n the social media world, conservative Christians are looked at as completely archaic and just horribly out of touch with reality – it’s only going to get worse for conservative Christians – slowly but surly, they will be dying out.