Twitter bans Trump, citing risk of incitement

Short Url
Updated 09 January 2021
Follow

Twitter bans Trump, citing risk of incitement

  • In an act of defiance, Trump tweeted “We will not be SILENCED!” from the @POTUS government account
  • Twitter reacted by deleted new Trump tweets on @POTUS and suspended his campaign account

WASHINGTON/PALO ALTO:  Twitter Inc. banned President Donald Trump’s @realDonaldTrump personal account on Friday, citing “the risk of further incitement of violence”.

In an act of defiance, Trump tweeted “We will not be SILENCED!” from the @POTUS government account, which has 33.4 million followers. 

“Twitter is not about FREE SPEECH,” Trump wrote in the now-deleted tweets, adding that he is considering building his own social media platform in the near future.

Twitter responded by deleted new Trump tweets on the @POTUS and also suspended the account of Trump's presidential campaign.

Twitter shut down his @TeamTrump campaign account shortly after it sent out a tweet with a “statement from President Trump” accusing Twitter of “banning free speech” and coordinating with “the Democrats and the Radical Left” to silence him.

The account shortly before that had pointed its 2.3 million followers to its account on Parler, which is popular with conservatives for its hands-off approach to content moderation.

Alphabet Inc’s Google suspended Parler on Friday, citing posts inciting violence, while Apple Inc. gave the service 24 hours to submit a detailed moderation plan.

Twitter has been under growing pressure to take further action against Trump following Wednesday’s deadly insurrection at the US Capitol. The social media platform initially suspended Trump’s account for 12 hours after he posted a video that repeated false claims about election fraud and praised the rioters who stormed the Capitol.
Twitter’s move deprives Trump of a potent tool he has used to communicate directly with the American people for more than a decade. He has used Twitter to announce policy changes, challenge opponents, insult enemies, praise his allies and himself — and to spread misinformation, flirt with inciting violence and denounce targets of his ire in capital letters.
Twitter has long given Trump and other world leaders broad exemptions from its rules against personal attacks, hate speech and other behaviors. But in a detailed explanation posted on its blog Friday, the company said recent Trump tweets amounted to glorification of violence when read in the context of the Capitol riot and plans circulating online for future armed protests around the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden.

FASTFACTS

  • Facebook and Instagram on Thursday suspended Trump’s account for at least two weeks, and possibly indefinitely.
  • Twitch, the live-streaming site owned by Amazon and used by Trump’s campaign to stream speeches, disabled Trump’s account until he leaves office
  • E-commerce company Shopify shut down two online Trump memorabilia stores
  • YouTube announced more general changes that will penalize accounts spreading misinformation about voter fraud in the 2020 election, with repeat offenders facing permanent removal
  • Reddit on Friday banned a forum for Trump supporters, called “donaldtrump.”

In those tweets, Trump stated that he will not be attending the inauguration and referred to his supporters as “American Patriots,” saying they will have “a GIANT VOICE long into the future.” Twitter said these statements “are likely to inspire others to replicate the violent acts that took place on January 6, 2021, and that there are multiple indicators that they are being received and understood as encouragement to do so.”
The company said “plans for future armed protests have already begun proliferating on and off-Twitter, including a proposed secondary attack on the US Capitol and state capitol buildings on January 17, 2021. ”
Twitter said its policy enables world leaders to speak to the public, but that these accounts “are not above our rules entirely” and can’t use Twitter to incite violence. Trump had roughly 89 million followers.

In the wake of Wednesday’s deadly insurrection at the US Capitol, calls mounted for Twitter, Facebook and other social platforms to suspend President Donald Trump’s access to social media — permanently.
Facebook and Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, on Thursday suspended Trump’s account for at least two weeks, and possibly indefinitely. Twitter, however, merely revoked Trump’s posting privileges for 12 hours after he posted a video that repeated false claims about election fraud and praised the rioters who stormed the Capitol.
On Friday, the company permanently banned two Trump loyalists — former national security adviser Michael Flynn and attorney Sidney Powell — as part of a broader purge of accounts promoting the QAnon conspiracy theory. Twitter said it will take action on behavior that has the potential to lead to offline harm.
“Given the renewed potential for violence surrounding this type of behavior in the coming days, we will permanently suspend accounts that are solely dedicated to sharing QAnon content,” Twitter said in an emailed statement. The company also said Trump attorney Lin Wood was permanently suspended Tuesday for violating its rules, but provided no additional details.




He has used Twitter to announce policy changes, challenge opponents, insult enemies, praise his allies (and himself), and to spread misinformation. (AFP/Getty)

The company says that when it determines a group or campaign is engaged in “coordinated harmful activity,” it may suspend accounts that it finds primarily encourages that behavior.
Social media companies have been under intensified pressure to crack down on hate speech since a violent mob egged on by Trump stormed the Capitol. Dozens of QAnon social media accounts were hyping up Trump’s Jan. 6 rally in the heart of Washington, expressing hope that it could lead to the overturn of the election results.
On Friday, the advocacy coalition Stop Hate for Profit launched a campaign to pressure the major platforms, including YouTube owner Google, to kick Trump off their services for good. The organization, which includes the Anti-Defamation League, the NAACP, the National Hispanic Media Coalition, Free Press and Color of Change, said it will call for an advertiser boycott if the platforms don’t take action by Jan. 20, the date of President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration.
Last summer, the coalition organized a monthlong ad boycott of Facebook that ultimately involved hundreds of companies to push for more assertive action on hate speech at the social network.
Some federal lawmakers and celebrities have likewise called on the tech companies to extend suspensions or ban Trump altogether. Frank Pallone, a powerful Democratic congressman from New Jersey, tweeted that “It’s time for (Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey) and Mark Zuckerberg to remove Trump from their platforms.”
“President Trump’s platform on social media has been used to incite violence and insurrection,” said Sen. Joe Manchin, a centrist Democrat from West Virginia, in an emailed statement. “Facebook and Instagram made the correct decision in banning President Trump for at least the remainder of his term and I will continue to urge Twitter and other platforms to do the same.”
Former First Lady Michelle Obama tweeted Thursday that Silicon Valley companies should stop enabling Trump’s “monstrous behavior” and called for them to permanently ban Trump and enact policies to prevent their technology from being used by national leaders to ”fuel insurrection.”
One former Twitter official has called on the platform to suspend Trump’s account in a way that would block anyone from following him and keep past tweets invisible for an indefinite period. It’s a change in position for Adam Sharp, Twitter’s former head of news, government, and elections, who tweeted Thursday that he had “long been a defender of Twitter’s permissiveness” regarding Trump’s violations of its rules. Sharp left the company in 2016.
Trump resumed tweeting Thursday. Twitter has said it could take further action as it kept track of “activity on the ground and statements made off Twitter.”
Other tech companies also acted against Trump’s accounts, citing threats of violence. Snapchat locked Trump’s account “indefinitely.” Twitch, the live-streaming site owned by Amazon and used by Trump’s campaign to stream speeches, disabled Trump’s account until he leaves office. E-commerce company Shopify shut down two online Trump memorabilia stores.
YouTube announced more general changes that will penalize accounts spreading misinformation about voter fraud in the 2020 election, with repeat offenders facing permanent removal. Reddit on Friday banned a forum for Trump supporters, called “donaldtrump.”
Whether the external pressure will lead to a policy change at Twitter is unclear, said Sinan Aral, social media researcher and director of the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy. But it is more in the spotlight because other companies have taken more aggressive steps, which could influence its decision-making. “Being the platform that is now making the proactive decision to give the microphone back kind of puts you in the spotlight,” he said.
Some criticized tech companies for blocking or barring Trump. Mexico President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who is seen as friendly to Trump, on Thursday said, “I don’t like anybody being censored or taking away from the the right to post a message on Twitter or Face(book). I don’t agree with that, I don’t accept that.” He said the issue should be decided by government and not private companies.

 

 


Ex-presenter Gary Lineker criticizes BBC for dropping Gaza documentary

Updated 05 July 2025
Follow

Ex-presenter Gary Lineker criticizes BBC for dropping Gaza documentary

  • It was the first time he had publicly criticized the BBC since his departure, which followed backlash over a social media post
  • He accused BBC executives of bowing to pressure “from the top”

LONDON: Former BBC presenter and football star Gary Lineker said the broadcaster “should hold its head in shame” after deciding not to show a documentary on medics working in Gaza.

Accusing executives of bowing to pressure “from the top,” Lineker made the remarks during a private screening of “Gaza: Doctors Under Attack,” where media reports say he was visibly moved.

It was the first time he had publicly criticized the BBC since his departure, which followed backlash over a social media post perceived as having antisemitic connotations — something he later apologized for.

After the screening, Lineker said the documentary, originally commissioned by the broadcasting giant, “needed to be seen. It really did need to be seen.”

He added: “I think the BBC should hold its head in shame. I’ve worked for the corporation for 30 years; to see the way it’s declined in the last year or two has been devastating really. I’ve defended it and defended it against claims that it is partial.”

The documentary, which features first-hand accounts from Palestinian medical workers and investigates alleged attacks on hospitals and healthcare facilities, was pulled by the BBC over concerns about impartiality. The decision sparked an outcry from pro-Palestinian groups after another documentary on Gaza’s children was taken down when it emerged the main narrator was the son of a Hamas official.

Lineker said that while the BBC “talks about impartiality all the time,” the reality was that the broadcaster was “bowing to pressure from the top,” something he described as deeply concerning.

“I think the time is coming when a lot of people will have to answer for this,” he added, warning that “complicity is something that will come to many.”

The BBC has recently been accused of biased, pro-Israel coverage of the war in Gaza.

Earlier this week hundreds of media professionals, including over 100 current BBC staff, accused the broadcaster of acting as “PR for the Israeli government.” In an open letter, they raised concerns over the role of board member Sir Robbie Gibb in the BBC’s coverage of Gaza.

Gibb helped lead the consortium that purchased The Jewish Chronicle in 2020 and served as a director until August 2024.

The letter described his position on the BBC board — including on the editorial standards committee — as “untenable,” citing the Jewish Chronicle’s alleged history of publishing “anti-Palestinian and often racist content.”


July edition of National Geographic Al-Arabiya explores nomadic heritage, digital archaeology, ‘maligned’ wildlife

Updated 05 July 2025
Follow

July edition of National Geographic Al-Arabiya explores nomadic heritage, digital archaeology, ‘maligned’ wildlife

  • Latest issue examines humanity’s evolving relationship with the environment
  • “The New Archaeologists” profiles social media influencers turned amateur archaeologists along London’s Thames riverbanks

ABU DHABI: The July edition of National Geographic Al Arabiya examines the complex interplay between humanity and environmental forces while highlighting exceptional cultural narratives and transformative global social movements.

The magazine’s 178th issue begins with an extensive feature on Africa’s largest nomadic group, the Fulani — some 20 million people who traverse the continent’s vast desert areas. These modern-day Bedouins continue their ancestral migrations with herds of livestock, journeying from Africa’s eastern reaches to its western borders in an eternal search for water and grazing lands.

The investigation examines how this ancient pastoral society confronts 21st-century challenges, from climate change to social upheaval, while working to elevate women’s roles in their deeply rooted herding culture.

A striking counterpoint emerges in “The New Archaeologists” which profiles an unexpected phenomenon along London’s Thames riverbanks — social media influencers turned amateur archaeologists. These digital-age treasure hunters have sparked both remarkable discoveries and heated debates over proper archaeological protocols.

The feature captures an emerging conflict between grassroots passion for historical discovery and established scientific methodology in an era where technology democratizes access to archaeological exploration.

The issue’s centerpiece investigation, “Our Maligned Wildlife,” challenges readers to reconsider nature’s most misunderstood creatures. From the notoriously pungent and ferocious honey badger to small-eyed vultures and scruffy aye-aye lemurs, the feature argues these “ugly” animals play crucial ecological roles — and that their supposed flaws may actually be evolutionary strengths.

Readers then journey to Romania’s Transylvanian countryside, where traditional farming communities maintain centuries-old agricultural practices despite mounting pressure from modernization.

The magazine concludes with a photographic retrospective marking New York City’s 400th anniversary, tracing the metropolis’s remarkable evolution from a small settlement to a global powerhouse pulsing with life and renewal.


BBC asks senior music team to ‘step back’ from daily duties after Glastonbury row

Updated 04 July 2025
Follow

BBC asks senior music team to ‘step back’ from daily duties after Glastonbury row

  • BBC said that it would no longer live-broadcast musical performances deemed “high risk”

LONDON: The BBC has asked senior staff overseeing music and events to step back from their duties amid a backlash over anti-Israel chants during Bob Vylan’s Glastonbury set, the broadcaster reported.

In a statement issued on Thursday, the BBC said that it would no longer live-broadcast musical performances deemed “high risk,” calling the editorial team’s decision not to cut the livestream “an error.”

During his act, the punk duo’s frontman, Bobby Vylan, chanted “Death, death to the IDF.” The BBC said that the band’s act was among the seven acts “deemed high risk” in advance and “suitable for live streaming with appropriate mitigations.”

“The team prioritized stopping the performance from featuring on-demand. This meant that no downloads of Bob Vylan’s set were available on iPlayer or Sounds,” the BBC said.

“However, the live feed, which was showing subsequent performances from other acts on the same Glastonbury stage, remained up until it was amended shortly after 8pm while teams worked on a technical solution.”

The broadcaster vowed to take action against “those found to be responsible for those failings in the live broadcast,” reiterating that there is “no place for antisemitism.”

British police said earlier this week that a criminal investigation was launched into the remarks at the festival in southwestern England.

The remarks drew controversy, with pro-Palestinian groups criticizing what they saw as selective outrage, highlighting the scrutiny over Bob Vylan’s chants against the IDF while atrocities in Gaza went largely unaddressed.

In a post on social media, Bob Vylan said: “We are not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people. We are for the dismantling of a violent military machine.”

The band noted that the backlash was “a distraction from the real story of the atrocities happening in Gaza. “Whatever sanctions we receive will be the distraction.”

The BBC has faced criticism from pro-Palestinian campaigners who accuse the broadcaster of pro-Israel bias in its coverage of the war in Gaza.

Last week, the BBC pulled the documentary “Gaza: Doctors Under Attack,” which featured first-hand accounts from Palestinian medical workers and investigated alleged attacks on hospitals and healthcare facilities in the enclave.

The broadcaster said that the decision was made because the film “risked creating a perception of partiality that would not meet the high standards that the public rightly expect of the BBC.”


Producer of dropped BBC Gaza documentary says broadcaster tried to gag him

Updated 03 July 2025
Follow

Producer of dropped BBC Gaza documentary says broadcaster tried to gag him

  • In a post on LinkedIn, Ben de Pear said he declined to sign the BBC ‘double gagging clause’ multiple times
  • The corporation shelved ‘Gaza: Doctors Under Attack’ amid widespread criticisms over controversial decision

LONDON: The executive producer of a shelved BBC documentary on Gaza has accused the corporation of attempting to silence him over its controversial decision to pull the film.

Ben de Pear, former editor of Channel 4 News and executive producer of “Gaza: Doctors Under Attack,” said he was repeatedly pressured to sign what he called a “double gagging clause” that would have barred him and others from speaking about the BBC’s decision to drop the film.

“I rejected and refused to sign the double gagging clause the BBC bosses tried multiple times to get me to sign,” de Pear wrote in a LinkedIn post.

“Not only could we have been sued for saying the BBC refused to air the film (palpably and provably true) but also if any other company had said it, the BBC could sue us.

“Not only could we not tell the truth that was already stated, but neither could others. Reader, I didn’t sign it.”

Describing the film’s production as a “painful journey,” de Pear previously accused Tim Davie, BBC’s director general, of taking editorial decisions he was not qualified to make.

“All the decisions about our film were not taken by journalists, they were taken by Tim Davie,” he said at conference in Sheffield. “He is just a PR person. Tim Davie is taking editorial decisions which, frankly, he is not capable of making.”

He accused the BBC of “failing as an institution,” calling for Davie and the corporation’s senior leadership to step down.

While the BBC has not officially responded, The Guardian reported that sources close to the matter denied the broadcaster tried to gag de Pear.

One insider said the request was a standard clause requiring producers to seek BBC approval before promoting its content — a claim disputed by de Pear’s company, Basement Films.

The controversy comes amid broader criticism of the BBC’s handling of Gaza-related coverage.

This includes backlash over its decision to drop “Gaza: Doctors Under Attack” because it “risked creating a perception of partiality,” its refusal to broadcast a performance by Irish rap trio Kneecap — one member of whom faces terror charges — and its failure to interrupt the Glastonbury live feed featuring anti-Israel chants by punk-rap duo Bob Vylan.

On Wednesday, over 400 media professionals — including 111 BBC journalists — signed an open letter accusing the BBC of acting as “PR for the Israeli government” and calling for the removal of BBC board member Robbie Gibb, citing conflicts of interest and editorial bias.

The letter also questioned Gibb’s alleged role in the BBC’s decision to drop the Gaza documentary.

Before pulling “Gaza: Doctors Under Attack” entirely, the BBC said it had delayed the film’s broadcast pending a review of another program, “Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone.”

Channel 4 ultimately aired “Gaza: Doctors Under Attack” on Wednesday night to critical acclaim.


Hundreds of media figures accuse BBC of acting as ‘PR’ for Israel, urge removal of board member

Updated 02 July 2025
Follow

Hundreds of media figures accuse BBC of acting as ‘PR’ for Israel, urge removal of board member

  • Open letter by media professionals, BBC staff say Gaza coverage ‘falls short’ of editorial standards
  • Sir Robbie Gibb, former chief of Jewish Chronicle, accused of ‘ideological allegiances’ to Israel

LONDON: Hundreds of media professionals, including over 100 current BBC staff, have signed an open letter accusing the broadcaster of acting as “PR for the Israeli government,” and called for the removal of BBC board member Sir Robbie Gibb over alleged conflicts of interest.

The letter, sent to BBC Director-General Tim Davie and the broadcaster’s board, follows a string of controversies — including the BBC’s live broadcast of anti-Israel chants by the punk-rap duo Bob Vylan at Glastonbury, and the decision to pull a commissioned documentary on Gaza.

“All too often it has felt that the BBC has been performing PR for the Israeli government and military. This should be a cause of great shame and concern for everyone at the BBC,” the letter stated.

The signatories — which include actress Miriam Margolyes, filmmaker Mike Leigh, actor Charles Dance, and historian William Dalrymple — claim the BBC’s coverage of Gaza “falls short” of its editorial standards and fails to reflect the reality on the ground.

The letter also raises concerns over the BBC’s decision to withdraw from airing “Gaza: Doctors Under Attack,” a documentary it originally commissioned, which will now be broadcast by Channel 4.

The BBC said it pulled the film because it “risked creating a perception of partiality.”

“This appears to be a political decision and is not reflective of the journalism in the film,” the letter stated. “This illustrates precisely what many of us have experienced first hand: an organisation that is crippled by fear of being perceived as critical of the Israeli government.”

Much of the criticism focuses on Gibb, a former head of the BBC’s Westminster political team and ex-spin doctor for Prime Minister Theresa May.

Gibb helped lead the consortium that purchased The Jewish Chronicle in 2020 and served as a director until August 2024.

The letter describes his position on the BBC board — including on the editorial standards committee —  as “untenable,” citing the Jewish Chronicle’s alleged history of publishing “anti-Palestinian and often racist content.”

The letter accuses Gibb of a conflict of interest and highlights what it sees as a double standard: “For many of us, our efforts have been frustrated by opaque decisions made at senior levels of the BBC without discussion or explanation. Our failures impact audiences.

“As an organisation we have not offered any significant analysis of the UK government’s involvement in the war on Palestinians. We have failed to report on weapons sales or their legal implications. These stories have instead been broken by the BBC’s competitors.”

The statement alleges Gibb has a “conflict of interest” which “highlights a double standard for BBC content makers who have themselves experienced censorship in the name of ‘impartiality.’”

The letter further stated: “In some instances staff have been accused of having an agenda because they have posted news articles critical of the Israeli government on their social media.

“By comparison, Gibb remains in an influential post with little transparency regarding his decisions despite his ideological leanings being well known. We can no longer ask licence fee payers to overlook Gibbs’s ideological allegiances.”

A BBC spokesperson said: “Robust discussions amongst our editorial teams about our journalism are an essential part of the editorial process.

“We have ongoing discussions about coverage and listen to feedback from staff and we think these conversations are best had internally.

“Regarding our coverage of Gaza, the BBC is fully committed to covering the conflict impartially and has produced powerful coverage from the region.”

The spokesperson added that in addition to “breaking news, ongoing analysis, and investigations,” the BBC has produced award-winning documentaries such as “Life and Death in Gaza,” and “Gaza 101.”