Free Speech Isn't Easy, And It Can Get Ugly, But It's Better Than The Alternative
Twitter is a private business and can ban Breitbart tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos -- as it did. Permanently, they say. It has not explained the reason for the ban, though there's talk of it being about a series of ugly exchanges with Ghostbusters actress Leslie Jones.
This started with a review, by Yiannopoulous at Breitbart, in which he reports that Ghostbusters is kind of a PC horror show:
An early mission for the new team will be a disturbance at a health food store. An obese female ghost is tearing the place apart, upset she can't find anything tasty to eat. Maybe she is worried she will be late to the ghostly JC Penney sale. Anyway, she is being lectured in the health food store by the ghost of Dr. Atkins who wants her to shed weight.The Ghostbusters capture Dr. Atkins while scolding him that "Ghosts can be healthy at any size." The girls point the portly poltergeist toward the nearest pizza shop and try to give her a high five on the way out, but the ghost is so large she slimes them all.
More:
The feminists themselves commit plenty of crimes. Spoiler alert: they kill Bill Murray. They don't just kill him; the movie chucks him out of a window. It's a clumsy metaphor for the treatment of boys in college campus kangaroo courts and in general in public life these days.
Sara Ashley O'Brien writes at CNN.com:
The review coincided with the deluge of hate tweets toward Jones -- but Yiannopoulos told CNNMoney that he's "not responsible for what strangers on the Internet post."
And there was terribly mean and heartbreakingly racist, terrible stuff said to her. In one case, somebody (apparently) impersonated her on Twitter, writes Kristen V. Brown at Fusion:
At one point, Yiannopoulos even began tweeting out obviously fake tweets masquerading as tweets from Jones herself. Though it is unclear whether Yiannopoulos actually authored the falsified tweets himself or simply shared them, it was clearly an attempt to further smear Jones online.
That's when she finally had it and went off Twitter.
As somebody who's had a mob after her online, my heart really goes out to her. I think this is absolutely terrible. Here's this woman who's worked as a comedian, who gets a big role in a major motion picture, and all of these tiny turds use that to shit on her. Even if she's the worst actress to ever walk a set, she didn't deserve this. It's "Lord of the Flies" treatment.
Spiked's Brendan O'Neill writes about the horrible, racist Twitter-hounding of Jones:
Jones is a very funny African-American comedian and the only good thing in the otherwise flat, weird and mirth-free Ghostbusters reboot. Yet for the past 48 hours she has been subjected to vile racist abuse by alt-right tweeters and gamers and other assorted saddos for her part in what they view as the feministic crime of remaking Ghostbusters with a female cast.The comments made about Ms Jones have been genuinely nauseating. She has been called the N-word. She has been sent photographs of apes. It's like something from the 19th century. No one who believes in racial equality and basic human decency could fail to be moved by her pained tweet following two days of relentless racial slurs: 'I feel like I'm in personal hell. I didn't do anything to deserve this. It's just too much. It shouldn't be like this. So hurt right now.' For any black person to be subjected to racist abuse is horrific; for it to happen to a woman whose only 'crime' was to land a breakthrough role in a female-oriented summer blockbuster is particularly despicable. Ms Jones hits the big time and is instantly bombarded with racist smears -- awful.
...What is most striking is how much this alt-right shares in common with the lefty SJWs (Social Justice Warriors) it claims to hate. Both are fuelled by the politics of victimhood: SJWs claim a massive culture of misogyny is ruining their lives; alt-righters insist a feminist conspiracy is destroying theirs. Both are mean: peruse the blogs or tweets of any vocal alt-right or SJW and you'll be struck by their disgust for anyone who disagrees with them. And both are censorious. Don't be fooled by the alt-right's freedom-lovin' postures. They're just as keen as SJWs to slam and ultimately end culture that offends them, whether it's Beyonce doing a Black Power dance at the Super Bowl or Ghostbusters with four women in it.
Jonathan Turley, who rightly called the attacks on Jones "disgusting and racist" and "highly offensive" -- which they are. In observing that Jones ultimately quit Twitter over them, he writes:
Yet, Jones is a celebrity and, in a free and open forum, there will be inevitable trolls and vile commentators. It is the cost of free speech that we often have to put up with a degree of garbage, including racists like some of those attacking Jones. On our own site, we have a civility rule and I try to catch racist or personal attacks but I also try hard to minimize deletions on a site committed to free speech. That results in commentary that I often dislike or find offensive. Yet, such hateful commentators are often shouted down by more mature commentators.Moreover, when people like Jones are subjected to racist or obnoxious attacks, it serves to lay bare the serious racial problems that we continue to face in this country. Removing evidence of such views just forces these commentators under ground and turns them into victims. As difficult as the trolls must be for celebrities like Jones (and I do not belittle the emotional toll even for a celebrity), these postings expose the problem rather than scrub it away through bans and sanctions.
...I remain very concerned about the increasing content-based censorship on Twitter, Google, and other sites. Yiannopoulos has objected that he is being punished for the comments or actions of fans and trolls as opposed to his own statements. Moreover, he has raised what he views as a double standard in the treatment of groups like Black Lives Matter and more conservative groups.
...I continue to believe strongly that, despite hateful or obnoxious speech on social media, we are far better off in maintaining a free and robust forum on the Internet than engaging in private censorship. The desire to silence critics can become insatiable as companies like Twitter sanitize their media through bans and sanctions. Whatever problems people have with Yiannopoulos, he remains a strong voice for young conservatives. Critics should answer him, not work to silence him.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Breitbart is on this.
Crid at July 20, 2016 11:01 PM
...And is anyone else annoyed that the man's name has been given to such an intemperate venture?
Andrew, we are told, was a butterfly of a presence, a warm and kind soul always.
Crid at July 20, 2016 11:03 PM
Mrs. Breitbart and her children should ask the current management of Breitbart to come up with a new name.
Trumpsuckers, perhaps?
I R A Darth Aggie at July 21, 2016 6:00 AM
I knew Andrew -- though we weren't of the same mind politically (and used to argue politics at a monthly writer dinner we both got invited to) -- and I don't see how the review Milo published was anything he'd have a problem with.
Amy Alkon at July 21, 2016 6:14 AM
All my conservative favorites on Twitter (Christina Hoff Sommers, Cathy Young, Gad Saad) march into battle every time Yiannopoulos's "free speech" appears to be in jeopardy--always with a little footnote that they don't alllllllways agree with him and, yes, "he can be offensive BUT..."--but they N E V E R exercise their own freedom of speech to stand up to the guy publicly in what I will call times of peace.
Why? I think they're scared he'll turn the flaming Eye of Sauron on them. That's kind of beside the point I'm going to try to make, but I'm saying it's disappointing, and they seem like his toadies and not his allies. They're the bystanders on the playground who could say something, but they don't. If you can't stand up to your friends, then you're not really that brave or principled.
Everyone here gets that Twitter can set their own standards for speech and conduct. Twitter is also a business with an interest in keeping celebrities participating. So we're talking about what is right in principle and also what's best for Twitter in the long run.
Where does everyone draw the line between free speech and harassment?
I watched this go down in real time. Milo is disingenuous when he says Jones reacted to a "bad review"--at the start of the exchange, she didn't seem even to know who he was--and also when he says he did not encourage the trolls. Yeah, he did. And he absolutely knew what was going to happen, because this is not his first or his hundredth rodeo, and he egged them on even after it became clear that Jones was extremely distressed.
After she'd been bombarded with racist DMs (pictures of gorillas in "other movies," calling her Harambe and a "big-lipped coon," and it gets worse) Jones made the apparently terrible mistake of posting screen shots on her public feed, so everyone could see what was happening. Milo, who has demonstrated a ridiculous obsession with this movie to pander to his gamergate audience, began publicly mocking her for being weak. This is when his suggestions began that she was whining about bad reviews.
She was not at that time. She was trying to shine a light on her hate mail.
He knew he was unleashing the hounds. He knows his demographic. Trolls started making fake Tweets of Leslie Jones saying disgusting things, and they flooded her feed with them. She panicked because they looked real, and maybe she's not that experienced and thought fans would believe them. Milo retweeted those--basically republishing slander. When Jones blocked him, he referred to her as a "black man."
I consider myself to be as close to a free speech absolutist as it gets, with the same exceptions that have been enumerated by the Supreme Court, but drowning someone else's voice out, lying about her, and inciting what's basically a virtual riot is on the line. And by the way, it's what Milo is bitching about when he visits campuses and people show up to blow air horns.
Insufficient Poison at July 21, 2016 6:16 AM
Twitter got a twofer on this one. Protecting it's base and stopping an egotistical hater (IMO).
A professional would have simply reviewed the movie once, made their points, and shut up as their "job" was done.
An egotistical hater does as IP points out and fans the flames. The movie is not the point. The attention they can get and the reaction they can originate and promote is their point. They hate everyone except themselves.
It's not a First Amendment issue. It's a behavioral issue. Good riddance. There's enough toddlers in the world.
Bob in Texas at July 21, 2016 6:36 AM
By the way, I have yet to see any Tweet or interview where Jones whines about any bad review of Ghostbusters--let alone Milo's.
Has she done that at all? Honestly, I don't know, but if anyone finds something, I'd like to see.
Insufficient Poison at July 21, 2016 6:45 AM
Eh, I can't feel too sorry for him. I read his review and I think he needs to get his meds checked. I am very conservative and can pick up on SJW bs pretty quickly, but his review made him sound demented. I did not think of the VA rape scandal as Bill Murray got tossed out a window by a ghost. Sorry, I just didn't see it. As for the plot, weird loner rejected by the world looking for revenge is a pretty common trope and easy to understand. Also, usually that character is, gasp, male. I can't think of time or a major movie where that character isn't male. I would rate his review of this movie as being on the same level as this review of a prom picture:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/5578/these-high-school-kids-created-awesome-prom-photo-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=paid&utm_content=bd3&utm_campaign=dwbrand
Basically, you see what you want to see.
I think Bob has got something here. The point of this review was not to help you decide whether or not to see the movie, but to serve up the red meat his fans were waiting for. He wanted a reaction and he got it. I am appalled by the hate spewed at someone who did nothing more than show up in a piece of summer entertainment. Let's be clear, she didn't deserve what she got and when you wonder why black people are so sensitive, it is bc of this crap.
Of course, ultimately the Left brought this on itself when it started using what were meant to be forums purely for entertainment as a basis for making a "statement" about some issue or another. Now, some people are so polarized that they can't switch that crap off long enough to enjoy a movie about GHOSTS! The world has lost all sense of perspective.
Sheep Mom at July 21, 2016 7:39 AM
I agree with everything Insufficient Poison and Bob said.
Jones got hate from both the left and the right. Alot of SJW's where attacking her for playing up the stereotype of the loud, uneducated ghetto black woman. If you watch the movie you'll see that the trailer wasn't doing her justice. But the massive hate came from 4 channers, redditors, anyone Milo was able to rally up, which is alot of people since....well the internet is mostly angry socially isolated young men.
The movie was a perfectly average summer blockbuster. I enjoyed it. Jones was a delight in interviews, since she is 48 and barely finding success.
It was also sad that no designer wanted to dress her for Ghostbusters until she spoke up about it.
Ppen at July 21, 2016 7:51 AM
"Of course, ultimately the Left brought this on itself when it started using what were meant to be forums purely for entertainment as a basis for making a "statement" about some issue or another. "
Yeah, there seem to be an awful lot of leftists who believe that their political beliefs and views are an appropriate topic for any occasion. Yesterday, former Space Shuttle commander Eileen Collins did a speech advocating for more funding for space flight at the Republican National Convention. Her speech was totally non-partisan; you can debate whether or not her plea was worthwhile, but she structured it very narrowly, as advocacy for the specific issue and not tied to anything else. And space flight per se doesn't seem to be a particularly partisan issue. Nonetheless, a bunch of lefties on Facebook jumped all over her for having the audacity to be in the same room with Republicans. The moderator of one of the Facebook groups repeatedly warned people that the thread about the speech was not a place to make partisan statements, but the leftist assholes just refused to stop, and they denounced the mods as racist. Nobody else could get a word in edgewise. The mods finally deleted the thread out of frustration. More proof for my contention that leftism is simply the Cluster B personality disorders cast as politics.
The Left talks a lot about "no-platforming" their political opponents. Well, starting now I am officially "no-audiencing" the Left. I categorically refuse to consider their ideas or listen to anything they have to say. I won't even acknowledge their presence if I don't have to.
Cousin Dave at July 21, 2016 10:57 AM
I don't have an issue with Twitter banning Milo per se. I do have an issue with their erratic and opaque rules for this. They've banned people for retweeting death threats against them without banning the originator of the threat. They do have a political bias. And they push that bias. It is the dishonesty about not admitting to that bias I take exception to.
Ben at July 21, 2016 11:37 AM
It's not a First Amendment issue. It's a behavioral issue. Good riddance. There's enough toddlers in the world.
Yup. And anyone, at any time, is welcome to set up a Twitter alternative with its own rules, and use it or not use it.
The Left talks a lot about "no-platforming" their political opponents. Well, starting now I am officially "no-audiencing" the Left. I categorically refuse to consider their ideas or listen to anything they have to say. I won't even acknowledge their presence if I don't have to.
That'll show 'em! Or something.
Kevin at July 21, 2016 11:45 AM
Cathy Young has chimed in (after I wrote above that she never seems to):
https://www.allthink.com/1488357
Insufficient Poison at July 21, 2016 12:22 PM
What Young wrote was well done. As it gets increasingly political there is a real risk of a twitter alternative springing up to replace them.
Ben at July 21, 2016 2:53 PM
Leave a comment