
Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour - everdev
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45442417
======
siruncledrew
If Twitter wants to ban him, then they can ban him. I honestly don’t know how
he gained so much publicity as a conspiracy theorist, but he sounds like
someone who’s drive is to continuously poke the sleeping bear and bother
people for the sake of being an asshole. Abusive behavior was his business
model.

~~~
newnewpdro
The horrifying thing is how many people his antics resonate with.

------
vivekd
I'm not a fan of Alex Jones. I think Alex Jones was at his worst during Sandy
Hook when he accused the victims families of being crisis actors. I think if
social media platforms had banned him then, I would have understood the
decision and applauded them.

What I can't understand is the decision of major social media platforms to ban
him now. His content now isn't any more out of the ordinary or abusive than at
any other point in his broadcasting history. So it just seems strange that
facebook, twitter, youtube, apple and spotify all come together and ban him at
the same time. And it seems even stranger that none of these companies can
give even a vague hint at the specific content he was banned for. I'm not
saying they have to broadcast the actual content but something along the lines
of "harmful, defamatory and malicious speech directed against Sandy Hook
victims" could work.

Silicon valley is starting to look more and more like a tech oligopoly. It
seems like these huge corporations are having discussions behind closed doors
and making decisions that have a major impact on the public discourse.

~~~
boxspam
This may have something to do with:
[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-news-
conspiracy-...](http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-news-conspiracy-
subpoenaed-mueller-roger-stone-20180905-story.html) I think the Russia
investigation has unearthed links between conspiracy theorists and efforts to
divide and undermine US politics and these companies were warned behind the
scenes to stop being complicit (or perhaps they had a inter-company meeting,
Bilderberg-style). Also there was a concerted effort by media companies to
have Jones banned. They kept him in the news cycle for weeks. Finally, the
left united to have him banned, made him an issue and visible to employees of
these companies.

------
dmix
Anyone know what videos or tweets were 'abusive'? Twitter didn't say which
ones they were.

Twitter needs to be more transparent about this stuff. Especially when banning
one of the most influential conspiracy theorist in the world.

Not to mention a vague and/or arbitrary banning policy is always a bad idea.

~~~
maxander
Twitter isn’t going to broadcast or link to tweets that were bad enough to
merit a ban, for obvious reasons- they’re banning it precisely to _avoid_
having that content be propagated any further.

~~~
tomohawk
This is circular reasoning, and it conveniently excuses any abuses or
hypocrisy by the company by disappearing the evidence and not allowing anyone
else to judge for themselves.

From an outside observer, there is no way to distinguish between the claim
that the ban is for "good reasons", or that the ban is a result of bias on the
part of the company.

~~~
LocalH
This is the same reasoning that leads to people getting banned from a service
for a reason, and then given a cold shoulder and absolutely no information
about _why_.

Perhaps this is fine in situations where the banned entity is a malicious
actor, but it presumes a zero false-positive rate. My opinion is, if even one
person is wrongly punished without recourse (other than rolling the dice with
social media) then the whole system is unjust and should be reworked.

~~~
craftyguy
Who, other than you, says that twitter must be just? The world would be a
_completely_ different place if companies were required by law to be just.

~~~
alexozer
What makes you think that they said that Twitter _must_ be just? Why not
simply _should_ be just? Why would you not want a platform as large and
integral to modern open communication to be just?

~~~
craftyguy
> integral to modern open communication

Why do you assume that it is integral to modern _open_ communication? (hint:
it's not, for plain reason that twitter does what's best for twitter)

------
natecavanaugh
This could have happened sooner, but glad Twitter _finally_ had the gumption
to do it.

It always amazes me, the conspiracy theorists, on the right in particular. The
government is too inefficient to do anything, but can create these elaborate
fictions and instantly turn into bastions of loyalty and commitment to a
mission that the right can't even seem to muster.

But when you're beliefs are unfalsifiable, and you have no respect for
objective truth, just perception and position, anything is possible.

------
xolorg
What happened to the HN I once knew. Anti-censorship no matter who the
individual. The fact that we have the majority of people here celebrating
censorship truly scares me.

~~~
tomjen3
It is not just HN. That seems to be the direction the entire IT section has
taken. Used to be we would respect DVD John and demand no censorship -- now
all with get is that meme that free speech is exactly the same as the US
admentment and that it can't be done by private parties, oh and it is not
censorship if your employer is haunded down, your livelyhood ruined and
everybody hates you if you say something somebody disagree with.

------
orf
The video that got him banned:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne_wFdA-1oU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne_wFdA-1oU)

~~~
yters
Lol, and the video was all about how the left censors people!

Seriously, I never gave Alex Jones much credence before this, but this getting
him banned makes him much more credible in my mind.

~~~
orf
I see it less about the left censoring people and more about a grown man
harassing a journalist by hurling abuse at his face for 10 minutes straight
(whilst invading his personal space with a camera), and topping it off with a
racist anti semitic dog whistle comment about his eyes. The guy being, for
lack of a better word, bullied in the video took it exceptionally well.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

~~~
yters
Yes, the bullying was uncalled for.

And what this has done has motivated me to look further into who Alex Jones
is, and reversed my opinion back to him being a scumbag. Seems he is only a
few ratings away from going full Holocaust denial in his mission to doubt all
official accounts of anything.

~~~
dwaltrip
He's an absolute, frothing-at-the-mouth nut job. It makes me sad how many
people listen to him.

~~~
yters
It is partly the fault of the established media that they make his message of
censorship believable.

------
aestetix
Given that Jack Dorsey just testified to Congress that he considers Twitter a
digital public square, does the "it's a private company" work to defend them
on such matters anymore?

~~~
alphabettsy
Of course it does. No organization private or otherwise has the obligation to
provide you a platform. As far as I’m aware the government doesn’t have to
provide you a platform, they just can’t deny you your right to have one of
your own making or limit your access to one that they provide to others on an
arbitrary basis.

------
dstroot
In the eyeball economy there seems to be no way I can personally reward
Twitter for good behavior. I’d like to send them $100 for banning the creep.

If I feel Apple is doing well with social responsibility I can buy more Apple
stuff. I certainly won’t click more ads on Twitter to reward them. So what
incentive do they really have to foster good behavior?

------
sheepmullet
Hopefully the banning of Alex Jones puts us on the path to breaking up the
tech giants.

~~~
vixen99
Now I wonder why some folk would not approve of that. Interesting!

------
forgottenpass
Twitter is a shithole of humanity where people get off on tearing people down.

The ultimate teardown is getting Twitter to un-person them.

(not my take, but thought it was interesting none the less)

------
fosco
Dupe:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17929417](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17929417)

------
enterx
What is Twitter?! :D

------
baxuz
Soo... When is Trump getting banned?

------
hsienmaneja
First off, there is compelling evidence that the Q movement is actually
controlled by senior intel close to Trump

Secondly, Q just posted that this is retaliation for action against @jack,
amongst other claims regarding infowars

Can anyone close to TWTR confirm?

~~~
boxspam
Qanon is a Russian psyop and a bunch of unwitting agents.

~~~
hsienmaneja
What evidence is there that it’s a Russian psyop?

Also, who are the “unwitting agents”?

And why did this comment receive a downvote? Just asking for clarification.

~~~
WalterGR
_Also, who are the “unwitting agents”?_

You are one of them, as an example.

 _What evidence is there that it’s a Russian psyop?_

Have you noticed that if someone disagrees with a Qanon claim the followers
ask, “What evidence is there that my claim is false?”

But if someone makes a claim contrary to Qanon orthodoxy, the followers ask,
“What evidence is there that _your_ claim is _true_?”

You can’t have it both ways.

You can’t make claims and expect people to prove that you’re wrong when _they_
don’t believe _you_ , then turn around and expect them to prove that _they’re_
right when _you_ don’t believe _them_.

~~~
WalterGR
To be clear, when I responded to “Also, who are the ‘unwitting agents’?” I was
explaining what boxspam meant.

------
IgorPartola
Why is Twitter always last to do the right thing? It’s almost like being a
publicly traded company robbed them of their last shred of humanity.

~~~
marcrosoft
"do the right thing" is difficult when you are suppressing free speech on a
platform that's supposed to be all about it.

~~~
Atlantium
Alex Jones is free to express his speech on his own website as much as he
pleases. "Free Speech" is not about forcing a company to host content they
don't like. That would be against Twitter's freedoms. Alex Jones will still be
heard by his audience.

~~~
starik36
That's like saying: Alex Jones is free to grow his own food on his land as
much as he pleases. This supermarket has a policy not to sell food to people
who violate our terms of service regarding hate speech.

~~~
henryfjordan
The supermarket is free to not sell to any particular person on the basis that
they constantly engage in hate speech.

It gets murkier when they start banning classes of people or ban someone for
something that puts them in a protected class, but any supermarket that banned
Alex Jones for hate speech would be well within their rights.

~~~
starik36
Ok, let's take it one step further. All the supermarkets in town decide not to
sell food to Alex Jones, essentially condemning him to starvation. Are you
still good with that?

------
modells
Crossfire, Alex Jones and Gordon Ramsay need their own shouting as a service
platform.

It sucks for free speech that he got banned because it gives him notoriety and
"credibility" in wingnuttery circles.

There ought to be other remedies to manipulative behavior for ratings than
simply banning.

~~~
mkbgw
I think Gordon Ramsey deserves better than to be grouped with Mr. Jones.

I haven't heard much from Milo Yiannopoulos since he was banned from Twitter
and other platforms. I suspect Alex Jones has a similar future.

~~~
Memosyne
After watching
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1X11aLACso](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1X11aLACso)
I would have to disagree; they both made money by verbally abusing others.

~~~
asdfasgasdgasdg
No, one gained notoriety by making incredible food. Incidentally, he was also
an abusive asshole boss, but that was not how he made his fame. Eventually
Gordon was so famous for his skills that people would _volunteer_ to be abused
by him on TV just to stand near his light.

The other is just a liar, blowhard, asshole. Alex Jones has never done
anything else of note besides the aforementioned.

------
adamrezich
Does anyone still actually think that Alex Jones isn't a character or persona
being put on by an actor, like Colbert's Colbert Report character? Not that
this excuses anything he says or does of course (though apparently what he
said here wasn't a big deal at all)... but how anyone can think Jones acts the
way he does on-camera after the cameras are turned off and nobody is looking
is beyond me. His lawyer essentially admitted as much in court!

~~~
epistasis
Are you serious, have you ever run into one of his listeners?

If anybody listens to him thinking it's not real, they are a tiny and
insignificant minority. What his lawyer admits in court means nothing to his
audience.

~~~
adamrezich
Yes I have, and he literally showed me his water filter and offered me a
glass. Doesn't change my point one bit.

