This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/04/should-trump-be-banned-from-twitter
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Should Trump be banned from Twitter? | Should Trump be banned from Twitter? |
| (about 11 hours later) | |
| Should Donald Trump, the most powerful man in the world, be banned from Twitter? | Should Donald Trump, the most powerful man in the world, be banned from Twitter? |
| Kamala Harris thinks so. On Tuesday she sent a letter to Twitter’s chief executive arguing that Trump has been violating the platform’s user agreement. Harris pointed to recent tweets Trump had sent harassing the Ukraine whistleblower and the House intelligence committee chairman, Adam Schiff, as well as Trump’s tweet threatening civil war. | |
| These, Harris said, constitute “blatant threats that put people at risk and our democracy in danger. No user, regardless of their job, wealth, or stature should be exempt from abiding by Twitter’s user agreement, not even the president of the United States,” Harris concluded. | |
| INBOX: Kamala Harris pens formal letter to Jack Dorsey asking him to kick Trump off Twitter, writing "these are blatant threats. We need a civil society, not a civil war. pic.twitter.com/zbC4dKUyEu | INBOX: Kamala Harris pens formal letter to Jack Dorsey asking him to kick Trump off Twitter, writing "these are blatant threats. We need a civil society, not a civil war. pic.twitter.com/zbC4dKUyEu |
| Twitter has acknowledged Harris’s letter and said it will be responding. | Twitter has acknowledged Harris’s letter and said it will be responding. |
| This is far from the first time Trump has been accused of violating Twitter’s rules; nor is it the first time there has been debate about whether the president should be kicked off the platform. The argument has been raging ever since he got elected. In January, Twitter addressed controversy about Trump’s tweeting – without explicitly naming the president – in a blogpost titled World Leaders on Twitter. | This is far from the first time Trump has been accused of violating Twitter’s rules; nor is it the first time there has been debate about whether the president should be kicked off the platform. The argument has been raging ever since he got elected. In January, Twitter addressed controversy about Trump’s tweeting – without explicitly naming the president – in a blogpost titled World Leaders on Twitter. |
| “Blocking a world leader from Twitter or removing their controversial Tweets would hide important information people should be able to see and debate,” the blogpost explained. “It would also not silence that leader, but it would certainly hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.” | “Blocking a world leader from Twitter or removing their controversial Tweets would hide important information people should be able to see and debate,” the blogpost explained. “It would also not silence that leader, but it would certainly hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.” |
| Is banning Trump an assault on free speech? | Is banning Trump an assault on free speech? |
| There’s been a lot of outrage about the sanctity of the first amendment following Harris’s call to ban Trump from Twitter. The Democratic presidential hopeful Tulsi Gabbard, for example, said: “We can’t just cancel or shut down or silence those who we disagree with or who hold different views or who say things even that we strongly disagree with. These freedoms and principles enshrined in our constitution are things we have to take very seriously.” | There’s been a lot of outrage about the sanctity of the first amendment following Harris’s call to ban Trump from Twitter. The Democratic presidential hopeful Tulsi Gabbard, for example, said: “We can’t just cancel or shut down or silence those who we disagree with or who hold different views or who say things even that we strongly disagree with. These freedoms and principles enshrined in our constitution are things we have to take very seriously.” |
| In response, Harris’s national press secretary, Ian Sams, accused Gabbard of echoing Fox News. “This was the exact talking point Fox News personalities were promulgating on air all day yesterday,” Sams tweeted on Wednesday. | |
| This may not have been the most helpfully worded response by Sams, who sounds like he is arguing that free speech is a rightwing talking point. However, it is true that banning Trump from Twitter isn’t really a free speech issue. As Twitter itself noted in its January blogpost, banning a world leader wouldn’t silence them. If Trump was forced off Twitter he could just go on Fox News every day. He could hold more press conferences. Hell, he could even start his own social network. | This may not have been the most helpfully worded response by Sams, who sounds like he is arguing that free speech is a rightwing talking point. However, it is true that banning Trump from Twitter isn’t really a free speech issue. As Twitter itself noted in its January blogpost, banning a world leader wouldn’t silence them. If Trump was forced off Twitter he could just go on Fox News every day. He could hold more press conferences. Hell, he could even start his own social network. |
| Further, it’s not like Twitter allows unfettered free speech. As Harris points out in her letter to Dorsey, Infowars’ Alex Jones was “permanently banned from the platform in 2018 for spreading disinformation and inciting violence”. | Further, it’s not like Twitter allows unfettered free speech. As Harris points out in her letter to Dorsey, Infowars’ Alex Jones was “permanently banned from the platform in 2018 for spreading disinformation and inciting violence”. |
| Twitter has also used algorithms to aggressively crack down on Isis propaganda. However, earlier this year Vice reported that, according to one Twitter employee who works in machine learning, it hasn’t taken the same aggressive approach to white supremacist content because “on a technical level, content from Republican politicians could get swept up by algorithms aggressively removing white supremacist material”. | Twitter has also used algorithms to aggressively crack down on Isis propaganda. However, earlier this year Vice reported that, according to one Twitter employee who works in machine learning, it hasn’t taken the same aggressive approach to white supremacist content because “on a technical level, content from Republican politicians could get swept up by algorithms aggressively removing white supremacist material”. |
| In short, there isn’t a genuine free speech argument for not removing Trump from Twitter. The company is a private platform with community guidelines that it has a long history of enforcing according to its own discretion. | In short, there isn’t a genuine free speech argument for not removing Trump from Twitter. The company is a private platform with community guidelines that it has a long history of enforcing according to its own discretion. |
| The most compelling reason to ban Trump is that which Harris brings up in her letter to Twitter: accountability. Banning Trump sends a message that Twitter is serious about its rules and that Trump, like everyone else must be held accountable for his actions. Not banning Trump, on the other hand, suggests that you can do whatever you like if you’re powerful enough. | The most compelling reason to ban Trump is that which Harris brings up in her letter to Twitter: accountability. Banning Trump sends a message that Twitter is serious about its rules and that Trump, like everyone else must be held accountable for his actions. Not banning Trump, on the other hand, suggests that you can do whatever you like if you’re powerful enough. |
| As journalist Elizabeth Spiers tweeted: “I think we fail to hold people in power accountable when we suggest that they should be immune from a platform’s TOS solely because they’re powerful.” | As journalist Elizabeth Spiers tweeted: “I think we fail to hold people in power accountable when we suggest that they should be immune from a platform’s TOS solely because they’re powerful.” |
| Would banning Trump be counterproductive? | Would banning Trump be counterproductive? |
| Twitter banning Trump would certainly send a message. The question is, which one? While some might see it as a win for accountability, the right would immediately interpret the move as censorship against conservatives and it would probably boost support for the president among his base. It might even help Trump win the election. | Twitter banning Trump would certainly send a message. The question is, which one? While some might see it as a win for accountability, the right would immediately interpret the move as censorship against conservatives and it would probably boost support for the president among his base. It might even help Trump win the election. |
| Trump's far-right Twitter summit: the most bizarre highlights | Trump's far-right Twitter summit: the most bizarre highlights |
| As well as turning Trump into the victim he so desperately wants to be, banning Trump would stop him from sharing his every fleeting thought. As Nate Silver noted, Twitter means the president can “communicate in a direct and unfiltered way with the public”. The spontaneous and unfiltered nature of Twitter may well end up working against the president. There’s certainly a scenario where he hangs himself with his own tweets, communicating things which will eventually help him get impeached. | As well as turning Trump into the victim he so desperately wants to be, banning Trump would stop him from sharing his every fleeting thought. As Nate Silver noted, Twitter means the president can “communicate in a direct and unfiltered way with the public”. The spontaneous and unfiltered nature of Twitter may well end up working against the president. There’s certainly a scenario where he hangs himself with his own tweets, communicating things which will eventually help him get impeached. |
| Ultimately, I think, the most important point thing to take out of the Twitter/Trump debate is that neither Twitter nor Trump are the real problem. It’s us, and our addiction to every tiny piece of Trump content. | Ultimately, I think, the most important point thing to take out of the Twitter/Trump debate is that neither Twitter nor Trump are the real problem. It’s us, and our addiction to every tiny piece of Trump content. |
| Rather than banning Trump from Twitter, we should be focusing our attention on how we cover him. After all, while 100% of journalists may be on Twitter, only a small percentage of the world is. Trump’s tweets become really dangerous when they are repeated and amplified by the mainstream news. | Rather than banning Trump from Twitter, we should be focusing our attention on how we cover him. After all, while 100% of journalists may be on Twitter, only a small percentage of the world is. Trump’s tweets become really dangerous when they are repeated and amplified by the mainstream news. |
| Donald Trump | Donald Trump |
| Kamala Harris | Kamala Harris |
| features | features |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |
Previous version
1
Next version