Twitter Threatens Trump Ban After Claims of “Hate Speech Violations”

Twitter is monitoring Donald Trump and threatens to ban him for violating “harassment or hateful conduct” policies following allegations from the left.

The liberal wing of the corporate media is putting pressure on Twitter and Facebook to answer demands from liberal activists calling on Donald Trump to be banned from their social networks for what they claim to be violations of the hate-speech policies against harassment and hateful conduct.

Facebook has responded by saying that comments from the President-elect should be considered mainstream political discourse.

Twitter, following a purge accounts of outspoken conservative activists, has taken a more aggressive line stating not only are they considering banning Donald Trump but the they are watching his account and will ban him as soon as they feel Trump has crossed the line in violating their policies.

The announcements from the social networks come among a flurry of claims from liberal activists claiming Trump has already crossed the line claiming he has repeatedly violated the harassment and hate speech policies of both social networks.

Facebook employees are already pushing for a ban of Trump’s Facebook page do to alleged violations and a Care2 petition to ban Donald Trump from Twitter has already gathered over 22,000 signatures.

Zero Hedge reports:

Twitter Threatens Trump Ban Over “Harassment And Hateful Conduct”

After being pressed by the media Twitter states President-elect Donald Trump could be banned for violating Twitter rules against harassment and hateful conduct

Since November 8th, the mainstream media and the social media giants of Silicon Valley have launched an all-out crusade against so-called “fake news” sources (of which we’re apparently one).  Twitter has gone so far as to purge dozens of “alt-right” accounts and just yesterday Reddit CEO, Steve Huffman, announced that he too would ban the “most toxic” Trump supporters who had the audacity to call him names after he abused his administrative privileges to alter other people text threads.

While this is clearly a politically-motivated crusade, one would expect that the newly elected President of the United States and leader of the Republican party, a man who received 60 million votes, would be safe from persecution, right?  Well, apparently not, according to an article published by Slate:

 Asked whether Twitter would ever consider banning key government officials or even the president himself, a company spokesperson responded via email: “The Twitter Rules prohibit violent threats, harassment, hateful conduct, and multiple account abuse, and we will take action on accounts violating those policies.” Pressed on whether that meant that, hypothetically, Trump himself could be suspended were he to violate those policies, a spokesperson confirmed: “The Twitter Rules apply to all accounts, including verified accounts.”

All of which brings up several important questions.  Does calling Chuck Todd a moron or Barney Frank disgusting fall into the “harassment” or “hateful conduct” bucket?  Are comments such as these exempt if they can be proven to be factually accurate?  All tough questions that need to be sorted out.

 

Facebook, meanwhile, has adopted a more permissive, reasonable stance toward Trump and other public figures. “When we review reports of content that may violate our policies, we take context into consideration,” a Facebook spokesperson said via email. “That context can include the value of political discourse.”

Meanwhile, even Zuckerberg admits that when 60 million people vote for someone then his comments should probably be considered “mainstream political discourse.”

 “Our real goal is to reflect what our community wants. That kind of content, we would have thought previously that would make a lot of people feel uncomfortable, and people wouldn’t want that. But at the point where the person who’s elected president of the United States is expressing that opinion and has 60 million people who are followers, then the question is, OK, I think that that is mainstream political discourse that I think we need to be pretty careful about saying that that’s not a reasonable [inaudible].

From The Daily Caller:

Petition To Ban Trump From Twitter Has Gathered Over 22,000 Signatures

petition-to-ban-trump-from-twitter

An online petition to ban President-elect Donald Trump from Twitter has generated more than 22,000 signatures.

The petition at Care2 Petitions has been around for a few months but it gained steam on Tuesday when Trump took to Twitter to suggest that people who burn the American flag should permanently lose their citizenship — or maybe go to jail for a year.

Shirley Burns, the author of the Care2 petition to rid Twitter of Trump, says that Trump “has crossed a line by attacking people on Twitter based on their race, religion, gender and more.”

Burns cites Twitter’s rules. “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,” a clause concerning “hateful conduct” in the Twitter rulebook explains.

Accounts “engaging in the activities specified below may be temporarily locked and/or subject to permanent suspension,” Twitter’s rules state.

“By locking or suspending Donald Trump’s account, Twitter can send a powerful message that hate is not accepted or condoned on their platform,” the petition urges.

In the past, Trump has tweeted rants which Burns and, presumably, the several thousand signatories of the Care2 petition consider sufficiently hateful.

In 2015, for example, Trump tweeted: “Druggies, drug dealers, rapists and killers are coming across the southern border. When will the U.S. get smart and stop this travesty?”

In a recent update, Burns cites The New York Times for the proposition that “Donald Trump has insulted 258 people, places and things on Twitter.”

“President-elect Trump is using Twitter to spread false information and propose monstrous ideas,” the petition says. “If Twitter doesn’t suspend his account, Trump will continue to use it as a state propaganda machine.”

A press release sent to The Daily Caller concerning the petition notes that Twitter has already banned Internet provocateur and Breitbart News tech editor — and Trump supporter — Milo Yiannopoulos.

“We call on Twitter to investigate @realDonaldTrump and temporarily suspend his account until, to use Trump’s own words, they can ‘figure out what is going on,’” the the petition beseeches.

[…]

Quarts reports:

Twitter says it will ban Trump if he breaks hate-speech rules

twitter-threatens-to-ban-trump

Twitter has been fighting hate speech for years. Now, it faces what may be the world’s most powerful troll: the president of the United States.

President-elect Donald Trump used Twitter for the past 18 months as a megaphone for his views and rants. He’s attacked the media, insulted women, praised himself, and lied outright. One of Trump’s recent claims— “I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally”—has already been rebuffed by Republicans, Democrats, fact-checkers, and election officials. Trump has produced no evidence to support it.

While Trump’s deceptive tweets may not violate Twitter’s rules against harassment, threats and “hateful conduct,” Twitter is still keeping an eye on his account for more egregious offenses. This week, the company told Slate it would consider banning key government officials, even the president, if its rules against hate speech or other language were violated. “The Twitter Rules prohibit violent threats, harassment, hateful conduct, and multiple account abuse, and we will take action on accounts violating those policies,” a spokesperson wrote. Twitter confirmed with Quartz that everyone, including government officials, were subject to the policy: “The Twitter Rules apply to all accounts,” a spokesman wrote.

rump may not have crossed that line yet, but he hasn’t exactly refrained from making incendiary claims. Most recently, he claimed that Abdul Razak Ali Artan, who allegedly carried out an attack injuring 11 students at Ohio State University, “should not have been in our country.” Artan was a legal permanent US resident, whose family had fled Somalia for Pakistan in 2007. He arrived in the States in 2014.

[…]

Read Full Article…

Slate Reports:

twitter-threatens-to-ban-trump

Could the president of the United States ever get suspended or banned from a major social network? The answer: It depends on the network.

It’s a hypothetical question, of course—but not merely an academic one, given the president-elect’s track record of using social media to sow conspiracy theories, attack reporters, threaten political rivals, and call for religious discrimination. Facebook and Twitter in particular have already struggled to reconcile their policies on harassment and hate speech with some of the activities of Donald Trump and his political allies. And the two social networks have offered starkly different answers to the question.

Facebook has indicated that it will not apply its normal community standards to posts from President-elect Trump, given their newsworthiness and the widespread popular support for his views. But Twitter told Slate that no one is exempt from its rules—not even the president.

Twitter recently suspended the accounts of several leading pundits and activists from the “alt-right,” a pro-Trump movement that is linked with notions of white supremacy, white nationalism, and anti-Semitism. Asked whether Twitter would ever consider banning key government officials or even the president himself, a company spokesperson responded via email: “The Twitter Rules prohibit violent threats, harassment, hateful conduct, and multiple account abuse, and we will take action on accounts violating those policies.” Pressed on whether that meant that, hypothetically, Trump himself could be suspended were he to violate those policies, a spokesperson confirmed: “The Twitter Rules apply to all accounts, including verified accounts.”

[…]

That’s a tough line from a company that once declared itself the “free speech wing of the free speech party.” But it’s in keeping with Twitter’s renewed emphasis on enforcing harassment and hate speech policies. Among the potentially relevant clauses are its prohibitions on the promotion of violence; targeted harassment of another user, including incitements to harassment; and direct attacks on people on the basis of “race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease.”

[…]

Still, the Wall Street Journal reported in October that some Facebook employees had pressed for Trump’s Facebook page to be suspended for posts that they believed violated the company’s community standards on hate speech, including posts that called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States. But Zuckerberg decided in December that it would be inappropriate to interfere with a major-party candidate’s political posts, the Wall Street Journal reported.

[…]

Read Full Article…

 

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*