(twitter.com)

1061 points danso | 1 comments | 29 May 20 07:24 UTC | HN request time: 1.699s | source

Show context

lykahb ◴[29 May 20 15:34 UTC] No.23351178[source]▶

The neutral companies, such as utilities, online hosting or financial providers serve nearly everyone with little objections - they defer to the law rather than any internal policies. The more selective companies such as newspapers and TV channels are expected to restrict who can get published.

By representing itself both as an open platform and as a company with progressive values, Twitter has put itself into an awkward in-between spot and is bound to create such controversies.

replies(7): >>23351236 #>>23351412 #>>23351773 #>>23351797 #>>23352829 #>>23355936 #>>23358514 #

1. nitwit005 ◴[30 May 20 04:37 UTC] No.23358514[source]▶

>>23351178 #

A number of countries are directly demanding they remove content that is considered "terrorist" or in some way an incitement to violence. Realistically, they have no choice but to have policies that forbid any such content on the platform.

France, for example, recently passed a law demanding that various illegal content be removed in 1 hour or 24 hours, or face enormous fines: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52664609

↑

Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”