Twitter Content Regulation And What You Can Do About It
There is no requirement to be on Twitter.
People like Andy McCarthy are upset that Twitter has announced new regulations on content communicated via its social-networking service. Twitter’s policy, called “Hate content, sensitive topics, and violence”. The policy states that it applies to “Twitter Ads,” but goes on to explain that these “paid advertising products” include all “Tweets,” as well as “trends and accounts.” How will these people convince us that Muslims are going to implement Sharia Law and eventually kill us all?
Twitter Can Do What It Wants
The First Amendment applies only to government action. As a private enterprise, Twitter is free to impose its own content restrictions. This is as it should be. Otherwise, freedom would be reduced by forcing everybody to follow arbitrary government imposed rules.
This is like complaining about the tenets of the Catholic church. Whether one agrees or disagrees, the church gets to decide what it stands for. Those who don’t agree with the Catholic church shouldn’t be Catholics. Those who don’t agree with Twitter’s rules shouldn’t be on Twitter.
What You Can Do If You Disagree
We’ve highlighted what those, seemingly of a conservative, religious bend, can do to affect this trend. The issue then was gay marriage, but the principle still holds:
Considering that all of the large tech companies, support the gay community, limiting internet use should be considered as well as a boycott of television. Both would work if the numbers were great enough, and I think they could be especially with television. Viewing demographics are easy to find on the net, and they are startling as far as the sheer number of hours America spends watching television. I think there’s been an ongoing boycott of broadcast television for years, which explains both the erosion of viewership and the supposed moral and artistic deterioration of primetime programming.
Religious conservatives must deny those who persecute and ridicule them the economic benefit of their patronage. Would it not be a win – win on multiple levels to get concerned religious conservatives to turn off the television, get off the computer, and read or get to know their wife and kids a little better, all the while denying advertising income to powerful adversaries?
