Double-Faced Facebook and Twitter

Twitter is just an opportunist private company wanting to further its own interests, like any other US private company.

Twitter has permanently suspended the account of the outgoing US president, Donald Trump, ‘due to the risk of further incitement of violence’. Speaking of Twitter, there is a mix of emotions where I am concerned. I believe in free speech and thought, which are the fundamentals on which the social media platforms are built. But sadly, freedom is at the cost of another person’s mental peace, physical safety and security and Twitter is just an opportunist private company wanting to further its own interests, like any other US private company.

Twitter bans Trump

It is amusing to see how many Indians suddenly became fans of free speech and infringement of it by Twitter. These fearmongers attached a private company’s action, fearing they could be next in India, as a threat to democracies. Sad, the various discussions surrounding it. I tracked the debates on foreign channels and mostly all spoke of Twitter being a private company, that freedom of speech should not infringe on others’ safety, freedom and so on. But the most important point missing was the double standards of a company like Twitter, that literally sucks up to the political leaders in India and many other countries, but with the winds changing in the US, they changed their tracks. One fact is, our Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s tactfulness is so that he has not incited openly, ever. But that does not mean he has reined in his supporters or ministers of his cabinet. For a leader who has not condemned lynching against Muslims, forget asking to stop them, he is never caught putting a foot wrong – that is any way how a diligent pracharak behaves and he is a thoroughbred.

The fact is, Twitter has allowed such a situation to fester. These companies have indulged many government-backed IT cell sorts in India, US and other countries. Obviously, their intense lobbying with respective governments comes at a cost. But they cannot be seen being soft on him, now that two articles of impeachment have been moved against Trump.

The important point is: It is not just today that Trump and his supporters were being allowed to get away with a lot of threats, misinformation and trolling. The fact is, this ban is not even controlling free speech. Both these private companies have no legal responsibility to host views, even if they are violent or inciting. It is more of a moral binding on individuals who publish offensive things against communities and individuals, as we have been seeing. Facebook’s community standards prohibit violent threats based on their religion, but we have seen they have not been consistent in applying these norms.

Double standards

Compare this to India, where we have been seeing a hypocritical stand taken by Twitter. Instead of banning the right-wing bhakts, Twitter has instead banned writers, human rights lawyers, scholars, comedians, media people and others who have questioned the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government. The right-wing extremists have been allowed to get away with criminal intimidation. Take my example, after the attack on journalists by lawyers at the Patiala House court complex, Delhi on February 15, 2016, the Press Club, Mumbai organised a protest to condemn them.

I tweeted about it and a person, Armendra Kumar Singh, threatened to sexually assault me, after which I filed an FIR. This person’s Twitter handled was blocked only after repeated requests, tweets and influence used by other colleagues. A person from Twitter India who was in touch with me blatantly blamed Mumbai Police, calling them inefficient and corrupt. I am the last one to defend the police, but by calling them names, Twitter cannot absolve itself of its own responsibilities and failure. The kind of bureaucratic red tape I was put through is not a joke. So after the FIR, the Mumbai police’s cyber cell should have contacted Twitter for further investigation, to get the IP address and arrest the offender. Now here lies the catch. This company and its staff know who to bend before and appease, in this case, obviously the current disposition. So they refused to give the details of the accused to the police under the pretext of ‘privacy’ rights. Meanwhile, I did my own snooping around because my elder sister and childhood friends living in the Bay area for nearly three decades know rights and loopholes. They told me Twitter was fibbing. Police, of course, were not inclined to pursue till the end, because here in Maharashtra too, we had a BJP government then. See how things function, with each passing the buck to the other.

The reason I recalled this case is to show the double standards of Twitter and Facebook. They block handles randomly, especially those who are against the current government. But nobody has incited violence or any harm. Instead, the ones who are not bhakts are facing serious name-calling, sexual harassment and some have even got death threats, none of which this private company and its heads think is a matter of serious concern. This is the case even in the US, where those who oppose white racism are facing death threats. Kelly J. Baker, historian, has written against white supremacy and she was trolled with death threats. She was asked to write an op-ed on the Capitol attack and she refused, as her family and she feared threats again. The point is, the private company’s belief in ‘freedom’ has conveniently allowed people to get away with criminal offences. These are not just ‘virtual’ threats. People read, sadly believe and one never knows when any staunch believer could just take the extreme step. Facebook is no different. One can recall the two young sisters from Palghar who put up a post after Shiv Sena founder Bal Thackeray died. A man known for provocative speeches and was associated with violent incidents. Shaheen Dhada questioned the bandh, (Mumbai city was shut down for a week in November 2012). Facebook did not have the spine to quote ‘freedom of speech and expression’. In 2017, seven people landed in jail for allegedly posting ‘objectionable’ things against Ajay Bisht, the newly elected Chief Minister Uttar Pradesh. Many people try to independently block posts and have reported the most offensive ones to the officials of both the companies and every time, they are informed, ‘not sufficient’ evidence, not authentic and so on.

In fact, activist Annie Ramsey, a feminist, founded a group called Double Standards, to flag offensive posts on Facebook. One such was the image of a woman in a shopping cart as if she were consumer item. But her complaints were turned down repeatedly since Facebook claimed they did not violate their community standards. These standards do not have a specific benchmark for measuring what is offensive or not. These also are left to interpretation, seemingly. The very fact that people are being allowed to get away making threats of violence, death, sexual assault, apart from other grave attacks, shows how these privately-owned platforms need to seriously modify their standards of ‘freedom of speech and expression’. Moreover, the political influence being wielded by these private companies is scarier and scarier, as these platforms have become the primary source for breaking news and sharing information. The two companies are in sync with certain political ideologies, they are in sync with governments, like in India, just going to show what a mockery their claim of freedom of speech and expression is.

Neeta Kolhatkar is a senior journalist with over 30 years of work experience across different media platforms. She is currently a freelancer and media consultant.

(Views Expressed Are Personal)