I have just shared a number of articles about how online disinformation and hate speech is handled in some of the best democracies around the world. I have read extensively about the subject & given it serious thought over the last year or so.
For those of you who were alarmed that the DA would somehow support the curtailing of freedom of speech is not something grounded in fact nor in the DA's record of protection of free speech. Like I said, we are "considering options" and made it clear WHILE PROTECTING FREE SPEECH
An opportunity has now presented itself in the requirement that Parliament tighten the definition of hate speech. Hate Speech is wrong, there cannot be debate there. HOW it is defined is important. It must be clearly categorised and what is free speech similarly made clear.
We live in a digital world, hate speech is now online. To prevent the abuse of hate speech legislation, it is important that online hate speech is tightly defined. There is now way we'd support curtailment of free speech online. We have fought this repeatedly in Parliament.
Glynis Breytenbach (one of the best legal minds in SA) & I will be carefully considering options. We will be consulting widely. So please, rest assured. We have fought against curtailment of free speech online & otherwise. But that must be separated from hate speech.
I hope I have made it clear & your fears are allayed? Shoot if you have any questions or suggestions. Again, this refers to conduct in the online space & keen to "hear" your opinions. Please let's be constructive and meaningful in this discussion. A tall ask on here, but y'know
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I’m on a road trip and I’m trying not to fall asleep. I’m obvs a passenger.
Time for a ridiculously long thread again. This time we’re talking definitions of social media manipulation tactics often use by parties, companies, foreign influence ops etc.
A 🧵🪡
1. As a start, this is a constantly evolving field, and the terminology changes because tactics change. Sometimes, there isn’t agreement on definitions. For example, fun fact: there is no real agreement in academia on what AI is and should be. But we move.
2. Disinformation: false information that is deliberately created or disseminated with the express purpose to cause harm. Producers of disinformation typically have political, financial, psychological or social motivations.
Let me let you into a secret. I probably shouldn’t because it’ll result in them toning this behaviour down. But, I think the abject lack of self-awareness will not make this happen for some. I’m throwing caution into the wind. Also, nice people don’t gatekeep.
You can tell a lot about the DA is thinking from various accounts. It is 99.9% correct. Also, I suppose I can discern this because I know all these people and their psychology very well.
- Gareth van Onselen is its inclination to assume everyone is stupid. That confidence as competence. That mediocre. That insecure. He gives a lot of insight into where that aspect of its personality is at - the petulant toddler
- Ryan Coetzee is cool, rational and EQ. Measured, smart, cautious, strategic. He’s the adult. He makes the most sense. He is not irksome.
- Leon Schreiber is John’s mind and the latest DA spin on the newest topic on which it has shot its foot.
- John is smart enough not to run his account. Listen to his interviews
- Helen’s actions are so predictable. She's a combination of the other three.
The coalition agreement between the DA, ANC, and IFP may not meet constitutional muster, I argue. Regardless of whether it has been agreed upon, it is null & void. It contains provisions that skirt too close to the violation of the party/state division.
A thread. 🧵🪡
1. To start, it is an exciting time. Finally, the ANC can be held accountable. Wonderful, but does that process meet constitutional muster? Is the process legal? I am afraid that it is not, in my humble opinion.
2. The agreement reads like its sole focus is on the appointment of Ministers. Vague requirements are included of alignment with the founding values of the Constitution. That is all well and good. It also commits alignment to the Bill of Rights. Lovely.
STOP posting photos of your kids online. Man arrives at kindergarten, says he’s 3 year old girl’s Dad. Her real parents arrive. At interrogation he reveals that he had found her photo online, needed to have her, found her school, looked for an open day & planned to kidnap her.
If you think this will never happen to you, please jolt your system into shock by watching this.
Start here if you don’t have time to watch the whole video.
I don’t know what the takeaways from this election are, but so far it’s:
-CR: probably best to resign. The ANC’s performance was dismal. I don’t think he is an awful person. He means well. I like him. But to spare SA what could be months of ANC warfare. When elephants fight…
-Zuma: My Lord. 🙆🏾♀️ I don’t think democratic South Africa has or will see anytime soon this incisive, masterful & diabolical a strategist. His career ended on a very sour note. Through this MK effort, he has added an epilogue to his story of a Phoenix rising from the ashes.
The final instalment. Only the top 3, I’m afraid, these take a lot of time. 🥲
I don’t think this analysis is interesting, however I hope it will foster deeper understanding about why ANC voters continue to vote ANC.
Election 2024: The ANC and the Politics of Loyalty.
A 🧵🪡
1. We all know the ANC’s dismal record, including the party itself and its voters. The question of why the ANC continues to lead the country despite this knowledge is intriguing. The answer, in a single word: LOYALTY.
2. “ANC voters are stupid.” This grates me to no end. It’s a paternalistic view devoid of any attempt at understanding the complex dynamics that make the ANC supporter loyal.