Social Media Censoring Is A Slippery Slope

by Neil Bamforth

There is an alarming increase in social media censorship from Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and a few other notable social media sites. While there is a clear need to censor social media, the reasoning behind the current spate is deeply troubling to me. A clear bias is emerging.

The obvious examples of ‘things’ that need censorship are, of course, pornography and extremist views and videos. Children may well have access to such things, so, for their sake if nobody else’s, there has to be some form of control.

While pornography is pretty obvious, extremist views and videos have become far more problematic.

A video showing ISIS propaganda, possibly with the beheading of somebody, clearly qualifies as both extremist and horrific and would be rightly blocked by all social media platforms with any modicum of sense.

Yet, Facebook, for example, has allowed a cartoon to remain on its site. A cartoon that shows a hooded black man cutting the throat of a police officer.

Facebook received, not surprisingly, a huge number of complaints about this particular image. One such complainant then published Facebook’s response. Apparently the image did not breach their community standards.

Facebook seems to be particular culprits in this bizarre censorship, or rather, biased censorship.

They recently had a purge. Any account that had frequent references to ‘skinheads’ was suspended. Thousands of them.

According to Facebook, it was because ‘skinheads’ are far-right, fascist, racists.

Really? So Neville Staple, a British black musician and former member of The Specials and Fun Boy Three is a far-right, fascist racist then? His account was suspended. His band played ‘Ska’ music, much loved by skinheads.

A number of my friends who identify as ‘skinheads’ suffered this bizarre Facebook purge. Many are fully paid up members of an organisation called ‘SHARP’, which stands for ‘Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice’.

You see, the skinhead is, for want of a better description, a ‘sub-culture’ in the UK. Being such, there are hundreds of thousands of ‘skinheads’ who like the music, the fashion, and everything that goes with the sub-culture.

The fact that some skinheads are indeed far-right, racist fascists does not mean they all are. Indeed, the vast majority are anything but. I know a few far-right racist fascists who look more like hippies.

Facebook, possibly as an American based company, clearly didn’t have a clue about the UK skinhead sub-culture.

They finally restored thousands of accounts with some inane apology.

A particularly noticeable bias in these social media platforms censoring, seemingly at random, groups and individuals, is that invariably, said suspensions and bans are of people viewed by some, rightly or wrongly, as far-right politically.

The fact that many are merely ‘right-wing’ rather than ‘far-right’ notwithstanding, who is Facebook or, come to that, Twitter or YouTube to ban people?

Besides, if you censor people and ban them, will they just go away and shut up? No, of course not. They’ll just find another platform to spout whatever they spout. Isn’t it better, not to mention safer, to know precisely where they are and what they are saying? Would it be better to have an organised ‘far-right’ completely ‘underground’ and difficult to follow?

Not to mention many are not far right at all.

Although, to date, I haven’t been ‘censored’, there are those who believe I am, at least, right wing politically.

Let’s see.

I fully support no privatization of our NHS. I fully support re-nationalizing our utilities and railways. Those are actually Socialist (left) credentials.

I fully support protecting the environment ahead of economical decisions, along with the wildlife within said environment. Those are actually Green (left) credentials.

I fully support the ‘WASPI’ women robbed of their pensions in the UK. I don’t think the ‘right’ generally supports them?

Then I move to the right on a particular topic.

Strict immigration controls. Returning migrants whence they came. Deporting illegal immigrants. Scrapping multiculturalism because it’s failed abysmally and created segregation.

So you see. How would they censor me? Would they just censor the ‘right-wing’ bit? A bit biased if they did wouldn’t you say?

Inciting racial hatred and violence cannot be tolerated, on social media or, frankly, anywhere else, and yet such things from the ‘hard left’ are tolerated.

I’ve tracked Facebook posts from people claiming membership of the Black Lives Matter organisation openly saying ‘Kill white people’, which clearly qualifies as both racial hatred and inciting violence, yet Facebook keeps allowing such posts to remain. Why?

I am aware of people having Facebook and Twitter accounts suspended – in some cases, they’ve been banned altogether, for simply being critical of BLM. No racial slurs. No incitement to hate anyone nor commit acts of violence, yet, apparently, their view didn’t fit whatever the narrative is at the moment.

Censorship is a very difficult thing to apply equally and fairly. Simply because the ‘censor’, whoever they may be, can easily have their decision colored by their own view.

These social media platforms really need to get a grip.

If they want to allow a cartoon of a hooded black man cutting the throat of a police officer – which, of course, they shouldn’t – they then have to allow a cartoon of a hooded Ku Klux Klan member hanging a black man, for example – which, again, they shouldn’t.

If a social media platform wants to censor, it has to censor across the board and not be more sympathetic to any side, whether based on political allegiance, race, religious belief or lack of.

President Trump is a good example. Twitter started waffling on about ‘flagging’ some of his Tweets – or something like that. What’s the next step then? Block his account? Really? So nobody would then know what is passing through what passes for his mind? Let the lunatic Tweet away. At least then, we’ll know what he’s thinking – assuming that’s a capacity he actually has.

Social media platforms are playing a very dangerous game.

They are not government-owned companies. They are owned and operated by very rich individuals indeed.

Governments may apply censorship for the national good – in their eyes – but, at least they are accountable for their decisions in office. If they get it wrong it can cost them votes, and they don’t like that, so they actually will try to get it right or, at least, not get caught when they get it wrong and change their mistake smartly.

Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey, Eric Schmidt, and the rest of them have zero right to censor you, me, or anybody else just because we are politically right, left, or anywhere else, provided we don’t write, nor speak, hate speech or incite violence.

‘Hate speech’ is simple to identify, yet social media platforms are increasingly considering simple criticisms of some groups as hate speech. It isn’t.

A politically right-wing person has just as much of a right to share their views as a politically left-wing person has.

Our freedom of speech is being eroded by multi-millionaires.

Start being afraid.

Happy

0 0 %

Sad

0 0 %

Excited

0 0 %

Sleepy

0 0 %

Angry

0 0 %

Surprise

0 0 %