Twitter CEO Defends Decision to Censor Trump But Not Iran’s Ayatollah Calling for Violence – IOTW Report

Twitter CEO Defends Decision to Censor Trump But Not Iran’s Ayatollah Calling for Violence

Dan Bongino:

The CEO’s of Twitter, Facebook, and Alphabet (Google’s parent company) are testifying before the Senate today, and it’s bound to leave conservatives as unsatisfied as ever.

The platforms have all been accused by conservatives of interfering in the election, whether it be by censoring the President’s social media, openly censoring the Hunter Biden story, rigging search results to those supporting a left-wing perspective, and more.

Twitter has been the most egregious as of late. The New York Post was locked out of their Twitter account after publishing their Hunter Biden exposé, and still remains locked out today. Kayleigh McEnany was also locked out of her account for sharing the Post’s story.

Twitter’s public justification for blacklisting the article was that it contained content that they believed was hacked. Of course the real reason was that it’s damaging to the Biden family with weeks until an election. If illegally obtained material was a problem for Twitter, they would’ve censored the 2017 story when Rachel Maddow obtained Trump’s 2005 tax return.

If Twitter had policies they enforced that would be one thing – but we know with certainly that the rules are being applied selectively. Another such case where Twitter’s rules are applied unevenly comes from their constant censorship of President Trump while refusing to apply their rules to Iran’s Ayatollah, who routinely calls for violence against Jews and others.

read more

16 Comments on Twitter CEO Defends Decision to Censor Trump But Not Iran’s Ayatollah Calling for Violence

  1. Repeal Section 230

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/05/28/what-is-section-230-and-why-does-trump-want-to-change-it/#7c88eb62389d

    Section 230 is a part of federal legislation passed more than 20 years ago. It runs only 26-words long—short and to the point. But it has had an outsize affect on life as we know it.

    They are the “26 words that created the Internet,” says Jeff Kossett, a cybersecurity law professor at the U.S Naval Academy and one of the foremost experts on Section 230.

    Most fundamentally, Section 230 provides immunity to social media companies like Facebook and Twitter against being sued over the content on their site. This allows them to operate and flourish without needing to moderate content.

    “Section 230 set the legal framework for the internet that we know today that relies heavily on user content rather than content that companies create. Without Section 230, companies would not be willing to take so many risks,” Kosset says.

    Read the entire article, it is worth your time

    4
  2. Hey Jack! If your ideology is so awesome, if you’re one of the good guys, why do you have to lie, manipulate and censor people who don’t agree with you? Look back through history at those with your M.O.. Not a savory bunch.

    3
  3. Twitter, Google, Facebook have all mastered censorship, blacklisting, and misinformation serving china in exchange for Chinese market share,,,

    It’s going to be a tough fight. We need Trump

    6
  4. I watched that exchange with Cruz…I was trying to figure out Dorsey’s accent…

    It’s Coffee House snob.

    I think He’s about halfway to Howard Hughes/Elvis Batsh*t Crazy…I hope He

    loses it on a Live Feed…

    4
  5. All of these Social Media CEOs are members of a secret club. It might be called the Pretzel Factory Club (PFC).

    Which they also think of as having a deeper double meaning of Privilege First Class. It’s purpose is to brain storm convoluted excuses (reasons) for their company’s censorship choices to be used when called out for their biases.

    2

Comments are closed.