I've given this more thought overnight. Twitter blocking people for any reason is the opposite of an ISP blocking Twitter. Analogously, the first is like censorship, in that it keeps specific ppl from publishing. The 2nd keeps everyone from reading, hence it's a book burning.
https://twitter.com/saracarterdc/status/1348993955288010754
To expound: when Twitter suspends an account, that person can still SEE Twitter. They just can't log in as a specific user account and post. They still have access to read, and (I think?) they're not prevented from starting a new account. Even if they can't, they can read anon.
But blocking the whole website, that's more than censorship. Not only can their users not post to Twitter (censorship), but they also can't READ Twitter (book burning). The effect of the latter is isolation from information that challenges their authority (like this tweet).
P.S. I think they topic of what is and isn't censorship is complex, and I'm not saying Twitter has no right to decide who posts to this site. They do, because Twitter is ALSO like a pub, with other users who have the right to not get pissed on by drunkards.
What I am saying, is that if you concede the ISPs point that Twitter is censoring, then what they're doing is book burning, by the same logic.
And yes, you can call the ISP and they'll give you your Twitter back. (If you can get through-I feel like their phones are likely getting DDoSed rn). But that makes the ISP authoritarian, because reading books (Twitter) has become a privilege not a right.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
