Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
What do you make of Twitter? Personally I loathe it. I think it gives a voice to the kind of slime who really shouldn't have a voice. (I mean the ones who address vile abuse not just towards me but even at my kids; one scuzzball even urged that I should be killed because he saw me on TV and didn't like what I had to say about the environment). I also think it's heavily biased towards the left. So why I do I waste time engaging with it?
Because if you work in the media - or if you're simply interested in catching up with the latest news and gossip, pretty much in real time - Twitter is a necessary evil. In the right hands - as the great Breitbart demonstrated - it can even be better than that: an invaluable way of showing just how mean and low-down the left can be.
But to my mind it is best treated as a playground where good people mix it up with bad people, where wisdom and insight mingles with idiocy and crassness, where the sublime (modesty forbids me from naming @jamesdelingpole) clashes with the ridiculous (that'll be you @piersmorgan). It would be a big mistake to take it any more seriously than that.
Yet this is exactly what the authorities on both sides of the Atlantic are now doing.
In 2010 came the pathetic case of Paul Chambers, 27, who lost his job and racked up thousands in legal costs for a jocular Tweet he had sent when his local airport was closed because of snow. It was the kind of flip - possibly bad taste but patently not meant seriously and patently not threatening - remark people make all the time on Twitter. Yet the state decided that here was yet another opportunity to break a butterfly upon a wheel.
You might think that the US had a more nuanced, intelligent approach to Twitter. But it doesn't. In January this year an Irish holidaymaker Tweeted excitedly before a visit to the US about his plans to "destroy America." Guess what: he wasn't really intending to destroy America. (Quite hard for a single tourist to do; and anyway, if you were planning on such a thing would you really announce it on Twitter beforehand). He meant it in the accepted European colloquial sense of paint the town red, party on down, generally have a wild and crazy time. But such subtleties were quite beyond the Department of Homeland Security. The poor man and his traveling companion were barred from entering the US.
Latest development in the saga of the authorities' grotesque over-reaction to Twitter is the imprisonment - yes, the imprisonment - of an idiot who, while drunk, Tweeted some deeply unpleasant, racially offensive things about an ailing footballer.
One of the prices we pay for living in a free society is having to endure the rantings of fools. Their drivel may be an irritation but it is surely less of a menace than the alternative which is to have the state assuming the power to dictate what does and doesn't (in its shaky opinion) constitute acceptable freedom of speech.
I can't say I loved it the other day when that young student issued a request to his Twitter friends that I should be knifed. But I recognized that he was a silly boy who had said something foolish in the heat of the moment and that to do anything more than demand an apology would constitute an overreaction.Yes, quite possibly under our new Draconian laws I could have had the kid prosecuted, perhaps even imprisoned, for incitement to violence. But if you truly believe in freedom of speech, that includes belief in the unalienable right of idiots to say idiot things without having their lives ruined forever.
- Comment (28)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
May '10
Re: Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
Yes, Diane, but until that happens Twitter will continue to accelerate in its devolution. Accountability is the only thing that maintains civilization.
May '11
Re: Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
Mr. Delingpole said: Yes, quite possibly under our new Draconian laws I could have had the kid prosecuted, perhaps even imprisoned, for incitement to violence.
Question. Wouldn't that be a great lesson for the thoughless little thug? Make them live by their own rules as Mr. Alinisky would say? Are you missing out on converting the "young skull full of mush"(TM) by letting him learn that all encompassing state power over our very thoughts and words isn't such a great idea?
What do you think?
Apr '11
Re: Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
Twitter is just a vehicle for the lower brain functions to come out before the rational higher brain functions kick in. The same goes for the blogosphere. The trouble is that many people seem to be mistaking this for acceptable behavior. Impulse control is one of the most important components of becoming a mature adult.
As for it being more a tool of the Left, that just makes sense since younger people are more apt to use it and they are predominantly liberal. Grown-ups with jobs and families don't have as much time for such things.
Re: Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
@davidknights. Well, yes, of course part of me thinks that. The scorched earth take no prisoners part. But I think mercy is a great virtue. I also think of the stupid things I did when I was young - some of which could have caused real damage and only did not do so thanks to the Grace of God. And I wonder what in the great scheme of things would have been achieved by ruining a man's life for Tweeting something he didn't sincerely mean.
Don't misunderstand me: I'm not a freaking hippy. I HATE the enemy. But I do think it's important to ask oneself - what exactly am I trying to achieve here?
Re: Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
Oh and Diane, as for Spike Lee: I think he should put away in prison on principle. You know, just for being Spike Lee, never mind the rest.
Jun '10
Re: Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
Diane Ellis, Ed.: But shouldn't some type of line exist on Twitter? Like in this case where Spike Lee and others tweeted and retweeted the alleged address of George Zimmerman, encouraging followers to "reach out & touch him"?
Turns out the address was wrong, and that two elderly people live there and now fear for their lives as a result of the tweet.
As it is, the couple in their 70s has already been harassed by a bunch of thuggish characters, but what if, God forbid, they wound up with their house burnt down or worse? Shouldn't Spike Lee be made to be held accountable for his part in disseminating the address and inciting others to violence? · 3 hours ago
Of course he should. For an example of how damaging this kind of thing can be, look no farther than Rwanda.
Jun '10
Re: Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
Iowahawk had a series of great tweets about ol' Spike this morning. A sample:
"After the lawsuit, @SpikeLee is going to understand what it's like to be a financial investor in a Spike Lee film."
"For those born after 1980, @SpikeLee is a guy who used to make bad movies. Now he's Yoda of the jock-sniffers."
May '10
Re: Twitter is Vile, but Censorship is Far Worse
I'm always looking for the magic hatchtag (hashtag?) that will summon the offensive progressive fools. I've tried #p2, and a few others. But nuttin arrives. I never even saw any of the Breitbart re-tweets. Sometimes, when I'm bored, I send "global moroning" tweets out, but get mostly earnest ignorant people responding.