Axios reports that She Guevara (aka ¡Ocasio-Cortez!) is being sued by Twitter users for blocking their accounts based on their political beliefs. The suits were filed after the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that Donald Trump may not block Twitter users for their political beliefs, even on his personal account.
I’ve let the Google story broken by Project Veritas percolated through the Interwebz for a day before commenting. I wanted to see how some of the usual suspects reacted. There’s only been one real surprise so far, and that was how long it took YouTube, a sister company to Google, to send the Project Veritas video down the memory hole. (BTW, if you haven’t seen the video, it’s available here. Go watch it, and come back. I’ll wait …)
Today’s TKPOTD deals with an effort back in 2015 to silence me. As part of that effort, my business and personal Twitter accounts were shut down. Twitter claimed that it was because of “targeted abuse” but could not cite a single example. I believe I was being punished for not following their approved narrative. However, I was one of the earliest victims of Twitter’s “safety” system, and my permanent suspension was only temporary. When the false criminal charge failed for lack of evidence, Twitter seemed to realize their potential liability. My business account was reinstated, but the lessons learned from that failure were used to refine their tactics.
Facebook, Google, YouTube, Pinterest, … the list goes on. They all seem to have the same sort of definition of fairness, one that wouldn’t survive the old Fairness Doctrine I worked under as a broadcaster in the ’60s and ’70s. These companies’ users aren’t customers. The users are the product being sold to advertisers, and as product, they are something to be moulded and controlled.
So why am I still on Twitter if I view it as an unfair platform and untrustworthy business partner? I can use it to promote blog posts at no real cost to me. Beyond that, it has no real appeal. I got on Gab when it was brand new, and I’ve made a small investment in the company because it really seems dedicated to free speech.
Except for Maps and Scholar, I’ll pretty much given up on Google. DuckDuckGo has been my default search engine for over a year. I’ll still link to YouTube content, put if I wanted to post a video, I’d use BitChute. I’ve deleted my Pinterest account. I no longer post to Facebook.
And I’m not the only person who has grown tired of online services who despise me.
Twenty years ago, as the Internet Bubble was bursting, Google survived because it was a robust company infrastructure with a viable business model. Coincidentally twenty years ago, Venezuela was one of the wealthiest countries in the Western Hemisphere with thriving petroleum industry. While I’m saddened, I’m not shocked by what Marxism has done to Venezuela. If I’m still around in 2039, I suspect that I’ll feel more schadenfreude than sadness for what a post-modern, neo-Marxist business model is likely to do for Google. Or Twitter. Or the rest of ’em. I certainly don’t expect to have use my shocked face.
… that I remember when the Left described themselves a The Reality-Based Community and informed those who didn’t agree that they were Science Deniers. On Saturday, Twitter locked the account of a noted Ph.D. psychologist because he tweeted about his scientific opinion which was based on his years of clinical practice.
Here’s what got his account locked:
BTW, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, lists gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. DSM-V serves as the principal authority for psychiatric diagnoses, and Dr. Blanchard was one of the contributors to the current edition.
Twitter experienced significant pushback which included some users tweeting direct quotes from DSM-V and then daring Twitter to ban them for it. Late yesterday, Twitter restored Dr. Blanchard’s account.
Final Score: Science 1, Twitter Safety 0
Laura Loomer is suing CAIR and Twitter. She alleges that Twitter improperly deplatformed her at the behest of CAIR. Here’s her complaint.
One of the lawyers representing Ms. Loomer is Ron Coleman. He recently successfully represented The Slants in their First Amendment case (Matal v. Tam) before the Supreme Court. He also was one of the lawyers who successfully represented Patrick Frey in the Kimberlin v. Frey RICO Retread LOLsuit.
IANAL, but the breach of contract claims being made against Twitter based on its unbalanced use of its Terms of Service to silence certain kinds of speech would have been the approach I would have taken against them if my account had not been restored after I had been permanently banned.
I think so, Brain … but truth isn’t a defense to a Twitter ban.
A short while ago, Arron Walker received this email about his @AaronWorthing account—
Aaron was simply using an old Saturday Night Live catchphrase to point out how the Fifth Amendment constrains any government investigation.
Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtin were unavailable for comment.
I’m scheduled to be on Fault Lines with Garland Nixon and Lee Stranahan at 7:20 ET this morning to discuss the Nunes v. Twitter, et al. lawsuit and the health of the Twitter platform.