Former Twitter Employees: 'Abuse Problem' Comes From Their Culture Of Free Speech (buzzfeed.com)

From the freedom-of-tweets dept. 

 

Twitter complained of "inaccuracies in the details and unfair portrayals" in an article which described their service as "a honeypot for _ _ _holes." 

 

 Buzzfeed interviewed 10 "high-level" former employees who detailed a company "Fenced in by an abiding commitment to free speech above all else and a unique product that makes moderation difficult and trolling almost effortless."

 

 An anonymous Slashdot reader summarizes their report:

 

  Twitter's commitment to free speech can be traced to employees at Google's Blogger platform who all went on to work at Twitter.

 

 They'd successfully fought for a company policy that "We don't get involved in adjudicating whether something is libel or slander... 

 

We'll do it if we believe we are required to by law." 

 

 One former Twitter employee says "The Blogger brain trust's thinking was set in stone by the time they became Twitter Inc."

Twitter was praised for providing an uncensored voice during 2009 elections in Iran and the Arab Spring, and fought the secrecy of a government subpoena for information on their WikiLeaks account.

 

 The former of head of news at Twitter says "The whole 'free speech wing of the free speech party' thing -- that's not a slogan.

 

 That's deeply, deeply embedded in the DNA of the company... [Twitter executives] understand that this toxicity can kill them, but how do you draw the line? 

 

Where do you draw the line?

 

 I would actually challenge anyone to identify a perfect solution. 

 

But it feels to a certain extent that it's led to paralysis.

 
While Twitter now says they are working on the problem, Buzzfeed argues this "maximalist approach to free speech was integral to Twitter's rise, but quickly created the conditions for abuse... 

 

Twitter has made an ideology out of protecting its most objectionable users. 

 

That ethos also made it a beacon for the internet's most vitriolic personalities, who take particular delight in abusing those who use Twitter for their jobs."

 

***

 “Why do you see the splinter in your brother’s eye but do not notice the log in your own eye? … You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly enough to take the splinter out of your brother’s eye.” 

 

Jesus Christ

Matthew7:3, 5

 

 There are several things to note here: 

 

The first is Jesus’ wry observation about perspective.

 

 The closer an object gets to the eye, the larger it appears—a splinter from afar is log-sized if it’s in one’s eye. 

 

So a fault in one’s own life is a far greater problem than the same fault in another’s life—the opposite of how we tend to think.

 

 But the point of the passage is to shut up only until one corrects one’s own life. 

 

And, contrary to much subsequent Christian theological development, the Matthean Jesus actually expects that a person can do so, ultimately living in a righteous manner. 

 

This would often be labeled “self-righteousness” today, though it is simply called “righteousness” in Matthew.

 

 The second thing worthy of note is Jesus point that only after correcting one’s own behavior will one see clearly enough to make adequate judgments and help anyone else correct his/her own behavior.

 

 This is a recognition of the human tendency to judge based on our own heart; that is, we tend to see ourselves in others. 

 

(The postmodern recognition of essential subjectivity is closely related to this concept.)

 

 Just like a man with a splinter in his eye, we see that splinter (only much larger than it really is—as a beam) everywhere we look. 

 

If we are arrogant, we tend to see arrogance in other people.

 

 If we are cruel, we tend to suspect cruelty in others.

 

 If we are lecherous (an outstanding and underused word—isn’t that a great word, “lecherous?”

 

Even better is the noun, “lecher,” as in “you filthy lecher!”), we tend to suspect sexual motives, desires, or behaviors in others.

 

 It is extraordinarily hard for us to break out of ourselves enough to truly empathize, seeing from another’s viewpoint, and Jesus makes the case that it is far harder—perhaps impossible—to do so when we are not pure hearted ourselves.

 

 As long as we hold to our own faults, we will see them in everyone else.

 

 But, as Titus 1:15 says, “to the pure everything is pure.”

 

 (Snitched from Jason Staples blog)