Jack Dorsey’s Censorship Is Injurious to the Public Interest

Himalaya Canada Farm Liberte

Proof reader Amy

Like many of you, I recently had the distasteful experience of being targeted by Twitter for very opaque reasons. First on October 14th, 2020 my “follower count” was reduced by 400 in the blink of an eye while I watched. Repeated attempts to get an explanation and have this rectified were ignored by Twitter. Similarly, on October 25, 2020, my Twitter account was “temporarily” suspended for 12 hours for unspecified violations of Twitter’s rules of conduct. As I later realized, this must have been because I had the audacity to suggest to my followers that they visit GTV.org to follow all the news about the Hunter Biden laptop story – stories which are being censored by Twitter.

Of course, this censorship angered me. Any time a self-appointed authority, dictator or monopoly treats us like children, or a troglodyte mushroom in a cave who cannot process new information and decide for ourselves what is important, it reminds us how critical freedom of speech, thought, and an independent Press is in a free society. The preservation of these ideals must be fought for, not relinquished to the likes of Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg.

Reading about the 1972 Watergate scandal in Wikipedia under the heading “Role of the media” we find this passage: “The connection between the break-in and the re-election committee was highlighted by media coverage—in particular, investigative coverage by The Washington Post, Time, and The New York Times. The coverage dramatically increased publicity and consequent political and legal repercussions. Relying heavily upon anonymous sources, Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein uncovered information suggesting that knowledge of the break-in, and attempts to cover it up, led into the upper reaches of the Justice Department, FBI, CIA, and the White House.”

The most important of these anonymous informants was nicknamed “Deep Throat” who, 33 years after Watergate, was identified as William Mark Felt Sr, deputy director of the FBI. Other than the Washington Post, Felt also anonymously planted leaks about Watergate with Time magazine, the Washington Daily News and other publications.

Deep Throat was an anonymous source whose revelations had not been verified, or authorized.

Fast forward 48 years to 2020 and the Hunter Biden laptop revelations. The social media giant Twitter is censoring the New York Post who broke stories about the e-mails on the laptop after taking steps to verify that the laptop belonged to Hunter Biden. Twitter is also locking the accounts of its users who link to the New York Post articles and other websites that are publishing videos and emails from the laptop (notably GTV.org/G-News.org). Twitter claims that these actions were taken because the New York Post articles violate its policies on “personal and private information” as well as “prohibition of the use of our services to distribute content obtained without authorization”.

These statements by Twitter are disingenuous, hypocritical and dangerous for many reasons.

Firstly, does the censoring of The New York Post and its articles about the Hunter Biden laptop mean that going forward all media articles containing leaked documents, which have been obtained without authorization of the owner, will be banned by Twitter? And will these standards be evenly applied to all media organizations? Of course not! We already know that the New York Times leaked the illegally obtained tax returns of Donald Trump in a September 27, 2020 article. This article was subsequently shared widely on Twitter. Are Donald Trump’s tax returns not “personal and private information”? Did the New York Times obtain Trump’s tax returns “with authorization” from the President? Hardly. Twitter is applying its “policies” unequally. Some would go further to say that how Twitter will apply its rules to you is wholly dependent upon what your political views are. This is hypocritical and dangerous in a free society where social media giants like Twitter and Facebook have a monopoly, and as a result, can mold public discourse.

Secondly, as outlined above, the Woodward & Bernstein revelations about the Watergate scandal would never have come to light if there had been restrictions about “distributing content without authorization”. Would Richard Nixon have given authorization for these revelations? The most important news stories in history are NEVER spawned in fully developed, verified and authorized form. Rather they evolve. The best journalism is investigative, exploratory, and preliminary. Any media organization that stifles the dissemination of such vital public interest stories is not contributing to the freedom of society but rather to its enslavement by special and powerful interests. Ideas are best exposed and debated in the ‘public common’. Good ideas are accepted and adopted, bad ideas die on the vine.

Jack Dorsey is acting like any supercilious and condescending autocrat naturally does when given too much power.

1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
7 months ago

take down the most evil ccp


Popular Articles