Man spraypaints Twitter office sidewalk with abusive tweets it refuses to delete

[riversedge]

Big video at link but no story

Link to tweet

Carrie Holbo? @CarrieHolbo 29m29 minutes ago
Replying to @BoingBoing

A-freakin-mazing.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes






Tracy? @TracyFootworks 50m50 minutes ago
Replying to @BoingBoing

👏❣️🔥😘
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes




Say What?? @_thumbs_down 1h1 hour ago
Replying to @BoingBoing

@XoCheapy
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes





bashan? @b_faureal 1h1 hour ago
Replying to @BoingBoing

Good job




Man spraypaints Twitter office sidewalk with abusive tweets it refuses to delete



Shahak Shapia reported hundreds of racist, sexist, abusive or otherwise hateful Tweets. Twitter didn't delete them, so he sprayed them on the pavement outside the company's offices in Germany.......................

[Egnever]

1. Who decided what tweets were offensive?

Not a big fan of this.

[progressoid]

3. Apparently Twitter decided that a few were offensive enough to delete them,

but they left the majority of them.

I would say the ones in the video are pretty offensive.

[Egnever]

15. So then this clown with the spray paint was not the decider of what can be posted on twitter then.

Sorry I would rather the folks who wrote that shit are confronted on it than defacing twitters property who had nothing to do with writing those tweets. Much rather they have to live with those tweets being out there.

Course it's easy to go after twitter.

No sorry fuck this guy. His heart is in the right place but this is BS.

[progressoid]

22. When someone says something offensive on a TV channel, they are often terminated.

Even FOX has removed some egregiously offensive people from their airwaves for things they've said and/or done. Those people are still free to spew their hate. Just not on that forum.

Also, Twitter's property wasn't defaced. It was chalk on the sidewalk and street. A little rain and it's gone; unlike the tweets.

[Egnever]

26. TV and twitter are two entirely different things

one is bound by FCC rules on what can be aired the other is not.

[whathehell]

5. Who decides?...Hmm..maybe women, gays and people of color?

You know, the people entitled white boys enjoy denigrating? ..Seems a good bet.

[Egnever]

14. Oh so free speech is gone now replaced by anti white guyism?

And why is Twitters property messed with they didn't write the tweets. Realistically there is no way for them to filter a lot of that stuff.

Sorry I would rather the people who write that stuff have to live with it on the permanent record.

[The_REAL_Ecumenist]

16. I humbly disagree...They can institute a set of BLACKLIST words & phrases...

the same way just about ALL sites have the ability to do. I own several websites & when setting up the sites, it gives you the ability to input a list of words that will automatically suspend the comment and place it in a queue that the owner has the option to approve or disapprove, delete & then ban the IP that the posted the objectionable material. BASIC "ISH" that WP TOOLS allow you or anyone else to do. There's NO EFFING WAY, that Twitter & Facebook DOES NOT have the SAME or BETTER ability to do. OH, and by the way, free speech is protected BUT the CONSEQUENCES of what some IDIOTS say IS NOT!

[Egnever]

18. Blacklisting words is not a realistic solution

Twitter has thousands of posts a minute there is no way to review every post with the word Jew for instance it is just not plausable. Hell they can't even keep up with the tweets that are reported by users forget starting to black list words.

That suggestion is ridiculous. It works on a site with low traffic but when the volume becomes thousands of posts a second it breaks down completely.

Your example is just not even close to workable without completely breaking Twitter.

[The_REAL_Ecumenist]

23. It IS workable as there are sites that have a HUGE TRAFFIC and

it's what they use and it fucking WORKS. Let's just agree that disagree because it's OBVIOUS that you are bound and determined to try to pound your nonsensical comments, whether they make sense OR not.

[Egnever]

25. LOL show me one

[whathehell]

29. Yeah, we all know how "oppressed" those straight white guys are, lol.

Free speech is is not necessarily free of consequences -- Little Mr. Bigot may have the "right" to say what he wants, but the executives at Twitter also have rights, and one of the those is to say "not in our space". Twitter was within it's rights to do what it did.

[LanternWaste]

10. Many people are not big fans of the consequences of hateful speech.

Many people are not big fans of the consequences of hateful speech.

[Egnever]

11. There's no consequences if they are deleted.

Like when say they go for a job and have that twitter record it is gone now.

[Ken Burch]

27. This happened in Germany-a country where, for obvious historical reasons

They are not free speech absolutists when it comes to hate speech. I'm fairly sure most of these would be banned under German laws.

[JoeStuckInOH]

2. Is it a matter of no twitter admins having seen the posts to get around to deleting them?

Or are they alerted on and then twitter determined "No, that post won't get deleted"

I'm not sure how twitter functions.

[Egnever]

19. Twitter handles over 500 million tweets a day

There is no one looking at all that stuff.

Users can alert on tweets but Twitter does take a pretty hands off stance on deleting them unless they are threatening or repeatedly abusive.

In 500 million tweets there are bound to be thousands that offend someone if not many and hundreds that are vile by just about any standards.

[flibbitygiblets]

4. It's free speech & shouldn't be censored. What they SHOULD do is remove bots

That's the real problem, but they are hesitant because bots increase their supposed relevance.

[whathehell]

6. Some call it hate speech.

[gratuitous]

7. You have a right to free speech

Twitter doesn't have to provide a platform for it, however. These little scumbag trolls can keep spewing out their little squirts of bile, but Twitter is under no obligation to host them.

[Egnever]

20. Absolutely true

That said Twitters business model relies on number of users so they are in no way motivated to start banning people unless it is truly egregious behavior.

Calling someone a derogatory word does not get to seriously egregious behavior.

[TeamPooka]

12. It's a private company and as such Twitter is a private space not public space

It's a private company and as such Twitter is a private space not public space so twitter can decide the rulesof what stays and goes
There is no free-speech argument to be made here

[TeamPooka]

13. There are TOS to be followed here at DU too

[X_Digger]

28. Protection of free speech only applies between you and the gov't. Not you & twitter, or you & DU.

Sorry to pick on you, but this drives me absolutely crazy.

"Rights" exist as protections between we the people and the government.

I owe you no free speech, no freedom of religion, no right to privacy. I can tell you to not utter the word 'christ' in my home or you will be asked to leave. I can tell you that in order to enter my home, you cannot be a republican, or have red hair, or be straight, or.. any reason. I can tell you that to enter my home, you have to empty your pockets and walk through a metal detector. None of that is an abridgement of rights protected by the first or the fourth amendments of the bill of rights.

[whathehell]

31. THANK you!...tired of bigots who think their free speech is "free" of consequences

[whathehell]

30. Number one: "censorship" concerns the government, not private industry

Number Two:. To the extent this DOES concern government, this concerns the GERMAN government, not ours and they have different laws.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Good for him!

It is sad how many think this type of shit is "free speech", it isn't. If a site has rules about content, like this one, then when you join you agree to those rules. You can't screech, "FREE SPEECH" when your tweet is removed for bigotry.

Twitter's policy:

Hateful conduct policy

Freedom of expression means little if voices are silenced because people are afraid to speak up. We do not tolerate behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another person’s voice. If you see something on Twitter that violates these rules, please report it to us.

How our policy works

As explained in the Twitter Rules,
• Hateful conduct: You may not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease. We also do not allow accounts whose primary purpose is inciting harm towards others on the basis of these categories.

Examples of what we do not tolerate includes, but is not limited to behavior that harasses individuals or groups of people with:
•violent threats;
•wishes for the physical harm, death, or disease of individuals or groups;
•references to mass murder, violent events, or specific means of violence in which/with which such groups have been the primary targets or victims;
•behavior that incites fear about a protected group;
•repeated and/or or non-consensual slurs, epithets, racist and sexist tropes, or other content that degrades someone.

So, don't "boo hoo" about free speech just because you can't say "Gas all the Jews!". Too fucking bad!

[Egnever]

21. And if you look at that TOS

You should notice it is pretty lax.

Twitter isn't trying to stiffle free speech the clown with the spray paint can is.

[The_REAL_Ecumenist]

24. AMEN Aegis!!!

F*ck em' if they get all huffy & pissy if they can't post comments like"lynch the n****r's" or "gang rape that stupid b!tch"..ALL I've read & seen both on Twitter AND Facebook.

[salin]

9. Interesting video.

if you watch it - watch it to the end.

[cp]

17. Bravo!

Creative way to call attention to Twitter's ignoring their own policy.