• About
  • Advertise
  • Careers
  • Write for us
  • Contact
  • Terms of service
No Result
View All Result
Saturday, March 6, 2021
THE MILLENNIAL SOURCE
  • World
  • US
  • Asia
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Profiles
  • Lifestyle
    • Food & Travel
    • Tech & Money
    • Health
    • Entertainment
  • Newsletter
TMS
No Result
View All Result
Home WORLD

The international reaction to Trump’s Twitter ban, explained

byJake Shropshireand Edited byBrendan Monroe
January 18, 2021
in WORLD
Reading Time: 5 minute read
The international reaction to Trump’s Twitter ban, explained

Source: Mario Anzuoni, Reuters

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linkedin
The move by Twitter has received worldwide attention with some world leaders heavily critical of it and others supporting Twitter’s right to enforce such measures.

In a controversial move two days after the violent storming of the United States Capitol building, Twitter permanently banned President Donald Trump from its platform.

The action to ban the president came after warnings from Twitter that further violations of its rules and policies would result in further penalization. On Friday, January 8, Trump posted two tweets, one of them insinuating that the people who voted for him had been disrespected and another stating that he would not be attending the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden.

Immediately following these tweets, Twitter banned the account permanently, saying in a statement, “these two tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence.”

Several other companies, including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Reddit and others, have followed in Twitter’s footsteps and enacted a variety of disciplinary actions on the president’s accounts.

The move by Twitter has received worldwide attention with some world leaders heavily critical of it and others supporting Twitter’s right to enforce such measures.

Germany

Steffen Seibert, spokesperson for German Chancellor Angela Merkel, called the ban “problematic” in a statement on Monday.

“This fundamental right can be intervened in,” said Seibert, “but according to the law and within the framework defined by legislators, not according to a decision by the management of social media platforms.” Seibert went on to say that “Seen from this angle, the chancellor considers it problematic that the accounts of the US president have now been permanently blocked.”

“The right to freedom of opinion is of fundamental importance. Given that, the chancellor considers it problematic that the president’s accounts have been permanently suspended.”

Seibert stated that Twitter’s move to flag inaccurate or misleading information was correct, but that banning the president altogether was a step in the wrong direction, adding that governments, not private companies, should be the ones making decisions regarding the limits of free speech.

Mexico

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador agreed with the German chancellor on the subject, calling censorship by private companies a “bad sign.”

“I don’t like anybody being censored or taking away from the right to post a message on Twitter or Facebook. I don’t agree with that, I don’t accept that,” he said in a news conference the day of the ban. “A court of censorship like the inquisition to manage public opinion: this is really serious.”

United Kingdom

On Wednesday, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson made a statement during a session with senior members of parliament, during which committee chairman Tom Tugendhat asked the prime minister whether he was “comfortable that a US company controls how you communicate with your electorate.”

Johnson, while not directly discussing the Trump Twitter ban, said that “there’s a real debate now to be had about the status of the big internet companies and whether they should be identified as mere platforms or as publishers,” going on to say that “when you start editorializing then you’re in a different world.”

“It’s time we had a frank conversation about the boundaries that we want to be set,” he added, and “the role of these companies in what they choose to publish and what they choose not to publish.”

China

Mei Xinyu, a researcher at China’s ministry of commerce, stated that the threat posed by big tech companies to countries is significant and worthy of attention.

“The behavior of these social media platforms has raised panic in other countries,” said Mai. “Tech companies in China have to make a positive impact. We won’t restrain ourselves economically. But in terms of political risks, we can’t allow this to happen in China.

This sentiment was echoed by a number of posts by individual Chinese citizens, as reported by The New York Times.

“A country as big as the United States can’t tolerate Trump’s mouth,” read a comment on the popular social media platform Weibo. Another comment put things a bit more bleakly: “U.S. democracy has died.”

Twitter

Twitter chief executive officer Jack Dorsey responded to the international criticism by saying that the action taken by his company “sets a precedent I feel is dangerous: the power an individual or corporation has over a part of the global public conversation.”

He also defended Twitter’s decision, tweeting that “Offline harm as a result of online speech is demonstrably real, and what drives our policy and enforcement above all.”

Having to take these actions fragment the public conversation. They divide us. They limit the potential for clarification, redemption, and learning. And sets a precedent I feel is dangerous: the power an individual or corporation has over a part of the global public conversation.

— jack (@jack) January 14, 2021

Twitter had previously recognized its role in not banning the president for tweets that would have other accounts banned. The company had argued previously that Trump was exempt from the rules because his tweets were both newsworthy and coming from a world leader.

This decision, however, came in a moment Dorsey felt was his job to “disarm as much as we can,” saying, “A company making a business decision to moderate itself is different from a government removing access, yet can feel much the same.”

Have a tip or story? Get in touch with our reporters at [email protected]

Like TMS? Subscribe to our free daily newsletter

Related

Tags: Longer readNorth AmericaPolitics
ShareTweetShare

Latest Posts

After raising US$8.3 billion in loans, what’s Tencent going to do next?

After raising US$8.3 billion in loans, what’s Tencent going to do next?

March 4, 2021
How would Senator Elizabeth Warren’s 2% wealth tax work?

How would Senator Elizabeth Warren’s 2% wealth tax work?

March 4, 2021
The future of cryptocurrency

The future of cryptocurrency

March 3, 2021

After an ascendant 2020, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is having a terrible 2021

March 3, 2021

The Biden administration’s changes to the Paycheck Protection Program

March 2, 2021

What are NFTs?

March 2, 2021

The Dasgupta Review offers economically viable solutions for combating climate change

March 2, 2021

Here are the biggest take-aways from CPAC 2021

March 1, 2021

LinkedIn is launching its own service for freelancers

March 1, 2021
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Careers
  • Write for us
  • Contact
  • Terms of service

© 2020 The Millennial Source Ltd.

No Result
View All Result
  • World
  • US
  • Asia
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Profiles
  • Lifestyle
    • Food & Travel
    • Tech & Money
    • Health
    • Entertainment
  • Newsletter

© 2020 The Millennial Source Ltd.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Create New Account!

Fill the forms bellow to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Add New Playlist

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

You can find out more about which cookies we are using or switch them off in settings.

The Millennial Source
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.