And why some on the right are calling it \u00ab\u00a0collusion.\u00a0\u00bb<\/b>
\nIn the past few days, Facebook, Apple, YouTube, and Spotify booted from their platforms podcasts, pages, and channels that belong to conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and his Infowars website \u2014 one of the biggest purges of popular content by internet giants in recent memory.
Jones and his various sites are leading purveyors of violent and sometimes racist (and anti-Semitic) conspiracy theories. The tech companies say they blocked Infowars not because of the conspiracy theories, but because, in Spotify\u2019s words, Infowars \u201cexpressly and principally promotes, advocates, or incites hatred or violence against a group or individual based on characteristics.\u201d
Facebook said they were shutting down several of Jones\u2019s pages for \u201cglorifying violence, which violates our graphic violence policy, and using dehumanizing language to describe people who are transgender, Muslims and immigrants, which violates our hate speech policies.\u201d Apple said in a statement to BuzzFeed News, \u201cApple does not tolerate hate speech, and we have clear guidelines that creators and developers must follow to ensure we provide a safe environment for all of our users,\u201d adding, \u201cpodcasts that violate these guidelines are removed from our directory.\u201d
Jones set off a round of debate in recent weeks about whether Infowars should be granted carte blanche on big social media outlets when he addressed Russia investigation special counsel Robert Mueller on his show, imitated firing a gun, and said, \u201cYou\u2019re going to get it, or I\u2019m going to die trying.\u201d (Facebook\u2019s statement almost certainly is in response.)
The Infowars website gets as many as 10 million visitors a month, and Alex Jones\u2019s YouTube channel has roughly 2.4 million subscribers, with 17 million views in the past 30 days.
Supporters of the ban on Jones \u2014 including the families of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting ( Alex Jones has stated the tragedy never took place) \u2014 argue that the conspiracy theorist\u2019s message constitutes a \u201csocietal crisis.\u201d But his supporters, particularly those on the right, like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, believe that limiting Jones\u2019s online reach is an affront to free speech.
Alex Jones has been a leading voice in the conspiracy theorist corner of the internet for more than 20 years, spreading ideas such as \u201cthe government controls the weather\u201d and \u201cHillary Clinton is a literal demon.\u201d As my colleague Zack Beauchamp wrote in October 2016 on Jones\u2019s views:
He was also one of the biggest pushers of the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, which eventually led a gunman to enter a Washington, DC, pizzeria and fire several shots.
On July 24, Jones issued a threat aimed at Robert Mueller on The Alex Jones Show:
Jones is a Donald Trump supporter and promoter. During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump appeared on Jones\u2019s show, saying Jones\u2019s \u201creputation was amazing,\u201d and Jones has repeatedly bragged that he is in close contact with the president.
In a statement on the decision to remove Jones\u2019s content from its site, Facebook said that the company was not doing so because Jones was a conspiracy theorist, but because he was \u201cglorifying violence\u201d and \u201cusing dehumanizing language\u201d against minorities:
More recently, Jones has been embroiled in a series of lawsuits filed by people about whom he has made repeated false assertions, like Marcel Fontaine: Infowars declared him to be the shooter at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida (despite the fact that Fontaine had never even visited the state of Florida). There\u2019s also Leonard Pozner, the father of a Sandy Hook victim, Noah Pozner, whose family has endured endless harassment by followers of Jones who believe that Pozner\u2019s son never existed.
To be clear, this isn\u2019t the first time Jones has been sued for making outrageous false statements. But now, supporters of his victims have started going after not just Jones but the platforms that host him and broadcast his messages \u2014 like Facebook.
Fans and supporters of Alex Jones (not to mention Infowars employees, like Infowars editor-at-large Paul Joseph Watson) have responded to the decisions by Facebook, Apple, Spotify, and YouTube by alleging that by striking against Jones\u2019s media outlets, \u201cBig Tech\u201d is engaged in \u201ccollusion\u201d and \u201celection meddling\u201d and is putting free speech at risk .
WikiLeaks also chimed in, describing the ban as evidence of a \u201cglobal anti-trust problem.\u201d
And they have been joined by Sen. Cruz, who has repeatedly defended Jones\u2019s right to speak freely on social media platforms while arguing that perhaps antitrust laws should be used to \u201cbreak up\u201d companies like Facebook. In his view, those who would shut down Alex Jones\u2019s outlets might do the same to people or entities with more mainstream perspectives.
To be clear, Facebook, Spotify, YouTube, and Apple are all private companies, and legally have the right to ban any entity from their platforms, including Jones. As Marissa Lang wrote in the San Francisco Chronicle in August 2016:
Facebook and other social media companies are not just massive corporations; they\u2019re vehicles for millions of people to share their personal views and perspectives. Many observers believe that shutting out a specific entity because of their speech doesn\u2019t bode well for them, or others, especially when \u201chate speech\u201d is at issue. The rules determining what hate speech actually is are often vague at best. (For example, in 2017, several Facebook users reported having posts taken down that referenced the well-known LGBTQ-themed comic strip Dykes to Watch Out For.)
Alex Jones\u2019s online popularity notwithstanding, it is unlikely that his fan base has the political firepower necessary to get his YouTube channel restored and his podcasts back on Spotify. But just as unlikely is an end anytime soon to the debate over who gets to say what on social media platforms, and how.<\/p>\n

\n

Similarity rank: 49<\/div>\n

Sentiment rank: -0.6<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n

TW posts: 38<\/div>\n

TW reposts: 8<\/div>\n

TW likes: 11<\/div>\n

TW sentiment: -3.3<\/div>\n<\/div>\n