Read on Twitter
My @RUSI_org Journal article @npwcnn quotes from in his @CNN piece asking ‘Will deplatforming make Trump & the far-right vanish, move--or radicalize further?’ is unfortunately paywalled, but here’s the core points: There’s lessons to be learned from https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/12/tech/deplatforming-trump-parler-effects/index.html
de-platforming of ISIS, but two are not directly comparable for a lot of reasons, incl. 1. Extreme right is—being very generous—an ideology and ISIS is a group. ISIS’s groupness is important ‘cause meant it could be formally designated as terrorist group by govs and once that
happens, it’s much more straightforward for soc media companies to de-platform members and supporters. There are very few designated extreme right terrorist groups globally, for which there are multiple reasons, but one is that many contemporary extreme right terrorist attackers
were not associated with any group. 2. ISIS heavily branded its online content, so once there was agreement that it was a terrorist group and that its content should be removed, soc media produced tooling that could accomplish this, based at least partially on that branding.
Extreme right content is much more difficult to agree upon and automatedly identify. 3. While it’s true that ISIS has been disrupted on major soc media platforms, this is less true for violent jihadism more generally. Demands to disrupt the extreme right are much more akin to
the latter than the former, and so are likely to have similarly uneven results. 4. ISIS just didn’t have the kind of support the extreme right has. Numerous heads of state, political parties, major media outlets, and large voter constituencies globally are supportive of the
extreme right. This shift in norms and values towards the right makes it difficult for soc media companies to respond effectively to the extreme right ‘cause they are accused of being biased against conservatives more broadly. 5. This, esp. in the USA, brings soc media
companies, most of the largest of which are American, into conflict with the spirit, if not the letter of the US First Amendment, which is at least one of the reasons why much of the recent de-platforming, incl. of Donald Trump, is based on incitement of imminent violence ‘cause
that is not constitutionally protected. 6. Having been banished from most major platforms, ISIS did not have many other high-profile, high-traffic sites to rely on. (Exception = Telegram). For First Amendment and others reasons, extreme right don’t face same level of difficulty.
They can be hosted on platforms owned/controlled by ideological fellow travellers and/or establish their own platforms. 7. Financial motives also play a role; both soc media companies and extreme right influencers have been profiting hugely from extreme right online activity,
which is heavily monetised. Due to their terrorism designation, their tight control of their media ‘product,’ etc., there wasn’t a whole lot of money to be made from ISIS’s online activity. 8. These factors, separately and together, have very much affected soc media companies’
attitudes to de-platforming the extreme right versus ISIS. And will also very much affect—together with others—our answers to the Q. ‘Will deplatforming make Trump & the far-right vanish, move--or radicalize further?’ going forward.
Finally, here’s a link to the @IntrepidPodcast Blog post by @AmarAmarasingam, based on his original Tweet thread, that kinda’ kicked this whole discussion off. It contains links to a bunch of research by @VOX_Pol and others re. de-platforming ISIS. https://www.intrepidpodcast.com/blog/2021/1/12/does-deplatforming-work-a-quick-survey-of-literature-in-the-wake-of-the-capitol-hill-attack
UPDATE: Many thanks @RUSI_org for making my original Feb. 2020 article titled ‘Routing the Extreme Right: Challenges for Social Media Platforms’ on which this thread is based freely accessible to all at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03071847.2020.1727157.
