My question is: if Twitter is so crazy about curbing hate and violence on their platform, how can the Taliban have an active Twitter account?
From the piece:
"As far as it's possible to tell, Twitter doesn't appear to have a policy against allowing members of the Taliban to use its platform. The company is no stranger to navigating arguments about whether high-profile, divisive figures should be allowed a voice on Twitter, but it's facing questions over why it's giving Taliban representatives a mouthpiece -- especially after it banned US president Donald Trump late last year.
"Twitter didn't respond to a request for comment about its policy on allowing the Taliban on its platform."
This is a mess brought about by the corporations that want to be considered persons under the rule of law in the U.S. but still want to operate globally and have to adhere to the laws of other countries. Nothing says that they can't wall off the communications of citizens of other countries from communicating with people of the United States. Twitter and all other social media platforms want the protections of this country but want to play in other countries in the name of profits. They shouldn't be allowed to play the victim as they have been and either ban all hate and violence per the U.S. laws and their own terms of service or they need to wall everyone off and create terms of service for every country.
There is no in between except for the people at these corporations that want to play the victim in every situation when their decisions aren't executed evenly across everyone.
Twitter is covered under Section 230 as a platform and is legally immune to any content it hosts in the US. So no, it wasn't legally required to kick Trump off its platform.
So it's not following any law when it decides to host one voice and ban another. I'm sure the former Afghan government never enacted content laws that affect Twitter.
It's whataboutism because Jack Dorsey is factually a jackass.
From the piece:
"As far as it's possible to tell, Twitter doesn't appear to have a policy against allowing members of the Taliban to use its platform. The company is no stranger to navigating arguments about whether high-profile, divisive figures should be allowed a voice on Twitter, but it's facing questions over why it's giving Taliban representatives a mouthpiece -- especially after it banned US president Donald Trump late last year.
"Twitter didn't respond to a request for comment about its policy on allowing the Taliban on its platform."