Read on Twitter
I’ve historically sided with free speech liberals and nothing has changed in my beliefs. I think it’s important the state cannot act as a gatekeeper for what is considered acceptable speech. But I do not consider a private company exercising its property rights a limit on this.
Personally, I do not think it sets a dangerous precedent for a private company to deny a twitter account to someone actively involved in a coup attempt against the president elect of the United States. That is their right and we submit to Terms & Cons when we sign up.
Those who are arguing that limiting Trump’s account is hypocritical, when outlets linked to other despotic regimes such as China and Iran are allowed to operate, are right. But that doesn’t mean Trump should get his account back. It means this precedent should be used elsewhere.
I think that twitter’s prerogative as a private company is to consider broader political context and to limit individuals’ account access when they incite violence or terrorism, which is exactly what has happened.
The same individuals who express worry about Twitter’s meddling in a domestic terrorism case would, I imagine, have no qualms with Al-Qaeda or despots being denied an account. I have to ask myself why they regard this instance as any different.
