Hacker News Reader

Comment by mc32 | Hacker News Reader

So now Twitter is trying to set the rules for speech world-wide. No company should believe themselves to be the sole arbiters of what should be and not be allowed in local jurisdictions's speech.

This is overreach. This isn't giving speech to people under dictatorships, this is being the diktator. They, unelected, undeferring, are dictating the rules, regardless of local laws, mores and so on.

If they continue setting the rules for speech world-wide from their world-view-only, I think we can expect to see more Nigerias, Irans and Chinas when it comes to Twitter --and I would not blame them. Arguably, they are interfering with the sovereignty of these places. Ten years ago people who like this sort of pannational rule setting would have been claiming "Imperialism" but it's okay because they are the imperialists.

View on HN

Why doesn't Spain just block twitter if they don't like an American company messing about in their politics?

If anything it shows just how reliant these politicians have become on a foreign company for their political ranting/culture waring.

The sole arbiter? This man can post on a million different websites. He can go on TV or the radio. He can place an ad in a newspaper. He can hold public meetings. He can stand on the corner handing out pamphlets.

Twitter is not, in any sense of the word, the sole arbiter of acceptable speech. Nor are they even remotely trying to be.

Spain (nor any other country) doesn't have a say on what's allowed on the platform when it comes to its own citizens. That's supranational control. To use a throwback phrase form the old guard, it's "Imperialistic".

What if WeChat, if TikTok, etc., etc., went all out with CCP propaganda and undermined Biden on all things China with regard to their US users? What if they decided they wanted to back a friendly candidate and have anti Biden propaganda? Are we cool with that? Or are they only cool when they carry water for you?

Let's suppose Mark Z decided he wanted to forgo US citizenship and went out and got Russian citizenship and then decided it was okay for FB to carry his new message? Cool? Oh, oh, do I hear calls of "interference"?

> Spain (nor any other country) doesn't have a say on what's allowed on the platform when it comes to its own citizens.

Except, they absolutely do? If Twitter wants to do business in Spain, it has to obey Spanish law. If it wants to succeed in the Spanish market, it has to appeal to Spanish consumers.

Your hypothetical scenarios are all based on a misunderstanding of my position here. It's absolutely the US's prerogative to take action against foreign companies that disseminate agitprop. Likewise, if Spain wants to step in and stop Twitter here, they can (and should!) do so.

That said, I think you're skipping the crucial middle step here where the citizens actually object to what Twitter is doing. Obviously, you think this is "propaganda" and "dictating the rules", but I don't see any indication that most people in Spain feel the same way. Where is the outrage from anyone other than a far-right political party that got ~15% of the votes in a historically low turnout election?

How convenient. Media mostly ignore an event. When there is predictably not much outrage among people that are largely unaware of it, claim this is evidence they think it's OK.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com