“Unlike Facebook, Telegram is a valid and appropriate place to organize an ethnic cleansing” is a *very* spicy take, Willhttps://twitter.com/willcarless/status/1125777869991550977 …
-
Don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t say platforms are obligated to help people organize ethnic cleansing, dude. I believe, as I have said, that tech companies have the right to decide who to host/platform. That’s their right. If Telegram wants to ban these folks, ok
This might be a surprise to you as a writer, Will, but words have meaning, and you said it would be “fundamentally wrong” for Telegram to deplatform people planning an ethnic cleansing of the United States. That suggests that platforms *do* have an obligation to platform them.pic.twitter.com/7k5ga46oeX
-
-
Ok. That tweet was sent hastily (and also includes the unfortunate typo “pubic.” Let me clarify: IMHO, there’s a difference between messaging companies and social media companies. Where we draw the line on this, I’m not sure. I’m *trying* to have a civil discussion about it
-
Do you that Telegram is both, right? That there are public groups where people share content, but also secretly chats? This was one of the main features that attracted ISIS to the platform. They could recruit *and* communicate.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
To clarify: I think the decision to deplatform should be made by individual companies. I also support people’s right to campaign to have those companies shut people out. Completely
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.