'Katie Hopkins permanently suspended from Twitter'

[Nearly Sane]

Never comfortable if the reasons aren't made clear

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53111295

[Robbie]

I'm not on Twitter but I read a tweet that she sent: ‘Dear @MarcusRashford, do you think women should think about how they are going to feed a child before they decide to have it? ‘I do not want to pay to feed other people’s kids. You are welcome to.’

Prior to that she was very offensive about BLM protesters, can't remember what she said word for word but it was nasty.

Katie Hopkins comes over as extremely unpleasant but not sure whether it's right to ban her from twitter for expressing her views, however odious.

[Roses]

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

[Owlswing]

I'm not on Twitter but I read a tweet that she sent: ‘Dear @MarcusRashford, do you think women should think about how they are going to feed a child before they decide to have it? ‘I do not want to pay to feed other people’s kids. You are welcome to.’

Prior to that she was very offensive about BLM protesters, can't remember what she said word for word but it was nasty.

Katie Hopkins comes over as extremely unpleasant but not sure whether it's right to ban her from twitter for expressing her views, however odious.

She no longer needs to be in the public eye - everyone knows what an obnoxious human being she is.

[Nearly Sane]

She no longer needs to be in the public eye - everyone knows what an obnoxious human being she is.

And yet I feel Rashford's response to her tweet 'Fuck Off' was more appropriate than a ban - though I am still not sure what she was banned for.

Twitter and Facebook are in an odd position here in that they have no duty to allow anything but it's unclear if there is any consistency.

[jeremyp]

Never comfortable if the reasons aren't made clear

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53111295

Controversial commentator Katie Hopkins has been permanently suspended from Twitter for violating its hateful conduct policy, the social media giant said.

I don't think people should be banned if the conduct policy is admitted to be hateful even by Twitter itself.

[jeremyp]

And yet I feel Rashford's response to her tweet 'Fuck Off' was more appropriate than a ban - though I am still not sure what she was banned for.

Probably not bringing enough advertising revenue into Twitter /cynicism.

Twitter and Facebook are in an odd position here in that they have no duty to allow anything but it's unclear if there is any consistency.

They don't have to be consistent: they are corporations, not arms of the government. I have grave concerns that our infrastructure of global communication seems to have been taken over by a couple of private corporations (actually, it's really just Twitter). 

[SteveH]

Vile, stringy-necked, horse-faced old harridan. She'll be permanently suspended from a lamp-post come the revolution.
Pedantic point: if it's permanent, it's a ban, not a suspension.

[ad_orientem]

Never comfortable if the reasons aren't made clear

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53111295

Good! A vile woman.

[wigginhall]

Not really about free speech, is it?  She's perfectly capable of ranting elsewhere.

[SteveH]

Not really about free speech, is it?  She's perfectly capable of ranting elsewhere.

The flip side of free speech is that no-one, and no organisation, is obliged to give you a platform.

[wigginhall]

The flip side of free speech is that no-one, and no organisation, is obliged to give you a platform.

Well, yes.  Hopkins' fans keep saying it's her free speech being destroyed.  No.   Most forums and blogs do ban people.

[SteveH]

 

Most forums and blogs do ban people.

Tell me about it!

[SteveH]

She's joined a new social network set up by some far-right yank called 'Parler', for swivel-eyed right-wing nut-jobs banned from Facebook and Twitter - and, theoretically, anyone else. However, I tried joining out of curiosity, but can't complete my registration. Apparently, unlike Twitter, you can't read it unless you're registered.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parler

[Nearly Sane]

There's no way I would register on Parler. Though on the subjects of Hopkins and Parler:

'British The Apprentice contestant and right-wing commentator Katie Hopkins appeared to join Parler and raised hundreds of pounds of crowdfunding donations in aid of a legal challenge to her ban from Twitter.[17] Susbsequently, it emerged the account in Hopkins's name was not authentic and had been verified accidentally by a Parler staff member.[17] Hopkins later created her own account.[17]'

[SteveH]

There's no way I would register on Parler.

Why not? It could do with some liberal voices to counter Hopkins and her ilk.

[Nearly Sane]

Why not? It could do with some liberal voices to counter Hopkins and her ilk.

Because it's financed by people who would take an increase in numbers as a justification for their views including lots of anti semitic shite. The well is already poisoned.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There's no way I would register on Parler. Though on the subjects of Hopkins and Parler:

'British The Apprentice contestant and right-wing commentator Katie Hopkins appeared to join Parler and raised hundreds of pounds of crowdfunding donations in aid of a legal challenge to her ban from Twitter.[17] Susbsequently, it emerged the account in Hopkins's name was not authentic and had been verified accidentally by a Parler staff member.[17] Hopkins later created her own account.[17]'

Parler? She should have signed up to Twatter.

[SteveH]

Twat. twatter. twattest?

[jeremyp]

Parler? She should have signed up to Twatter.

She's already banned from that. "Twitter" is actually a misprint.

[Robbie]

Why not? It could do with some liberal voices to counter Hopkins and her ilk.

You'd probaby be banned in no time. The big thing would be your name associated with right wingers even if you didn't support. If Big Bros was watching 'it' wouldn't be reading the details, just have your name. You would likely end up with countless invitations to other right wing things. I'd steer well clear.

[SteveH]

You'd probaby be banned in no time. The big thing would be your name associated with right wingers even if you didn't support. If Big Bros was watching 'it' wouldn't be reading the details, just have your name. You would likely end up with countless invitations to other right wing things. I'd steer well clear.

Good points, but it won't let me join anyway - I can't get past the Captcha.

[SteveH]

Interesting, incidentally, how it's always right-wingers who start up their own biased versions of other sites: as well as Parler, a Twitter rip-off. there are at least two Wikipedia rip-offs: Conservipedia, for the hard right, and Metapedia, a pretentiously pseudo-intellectual version for neo-nazis. No doubt there are more - Racebook, maybe? - but no left-wing versions that I know of.