Why Twitter's Inconsistent Policies Victimize Independent Journalists

It was when the U.S. President Trump retweeted three Islamophobic videos from the Twitter feed of “Britain First”, which is known as a xenophobic group in the United Kingdom. The videos were tweeted without context with titles that say: “Muslim migrant beats up Dutch boy on crutches!” It was argued then that they incited hatred against Muslims and should be unpublished.

In response to the controversy, Twitter took a puzzling position that suggested arbitrariness in the enforcement of its user policies. As the company told Sam Biddle of The Intercept, while Trump’s retweets constituted “hateful conduct,” which would qualify them for removal under Twitter’s policy, “we believe there is a legitimate public interest in its availability.” Twitter retracted its position a day later, and said the tweets would remain, in accordance with its “media policy.”

But on other fronts, Twitter implements harsher measures. The victims in the latest case have been Wael Abbas, an award-winning Egyptian journalist, and Amina Ismail, a Reuters reporter based in Cairo, who had their Twitter accounts suspended without any explanation. There were allegations that these critical journalists were violating the company's impersonation policy, but no further proof was presented. Questions remain open, too, why such policies against the troll armies employed by oppressive governments are left untouched, free to conduct hate campaigns against dissidents.

Currently, there is no evidence suggesting that Twitter is, in fact, cooperating with any government. At the very least, however, the company is allowing its platform to be used to spew hate, while impeding the work of journalists who are risking their lives to tell the truth.