Free Speech a Test for Twitter - begins blocking messages after govt demands...
TECHNOLOGY August 4, 2013, 7:57 p.m. ET
For Twitter, Free Speech Is a High-Wire Act
As Micro-Blogging Site Expands Globally, It Gets Flak
From Many Sides
By SHIRA OVIDE CONNECT
Twitter Inc.'s growing ambitions are making it harder to
carry the Internet's free-speech banner.
Chief Executive Dick Costolo promotes Twitter as a
protector of more than 200 million people who broadcast their lives, be it love
for a new pop song or Tahrir Square protests. But increasingly, freewheeling
tweets are clashing with divergent global laws and standards in markets where
Twitter is spreading its wings.
"You have to abide by the rule of law in the
countries in which you operate," the 49-year-old Mr. Costolo said in an
interview at Twitter's San Francisco headquarters. Defending free expression
"gets more challenging for us as a company as we become an ever-growing global
company, and have a presence and offices and people on the ground around the
world."
In recent weeks, Twitter has found itself labeled a
censor, an enabler of hate speech and a tool of Big Brother. It drew flak in
July for turning over to French prosecutors information about users who tweeted
anti-Semitic messages. U.K. lawmakers in the last week have blasted Twitter for
failing to deal effectively with abusive tweets, after an activist was
threatened repeatedly by other Twitter users.
Twitter's hands-off approach to users' expression is
being stressed as it opens offices in countries including France, Germany and
Brazil ahead of its expected initial public stock offering—making workers and
company assets subject to arrest or seizure if it breaks local laws.
All Internet companies have to walk a fine line between
protecting free expression and creating hospitable services. Battles erupt
over, for example, whether Google Inc. should
have done more to pull down a YouTube video considered insulting to Muslims, or
whether Facebook Inc. goes too far in barring some photos of breast-feeding
women.
Recent controversy over Internet companies' involvement
in U.S. spying programs underscored how a handful of tech companies like
Twitter are the last line of defense for massive caches of personal
information.
Twitter's speech conundrum is particularly acute because
the high bar it sets for itself exposes the company to criticism that it isn't
living up to its ideals.
Just ask Malcolm Harris, an Occupy Wall Street protester
whom Twitter initially backed in a high-profile disorderly-conduct trial.
Twitter in September complied with prosecutors' demands for his Twitter
messages and other account information. The company faced a contempt-of-court
citation and fine if it didn't comply.
"Though it's clear their heart is with their users,
it was disappointing not to see them go all the way to the mat," Mr.
Harris said in an email. "I hope in the future they're more creative about
how they protect user information."
To help counter abuse, Twitter several weeks ago started
letting users click on a single button to initiate a report about tweets they
believe are malicious.
Mr. Costolo, who has held up Twitter's long legal fight
in the Harris case as an example of Twitter's defense of users, declined to
comment, as did a Twitter spokesman.
Historically, digital-rights advocates say that Twitter
has been more willing than most U.S. companies to fight government demands to
reveal private Twitter information. The company also gives a wide berth to
tweets about unpopular points of view and to controversial groups like
Anonymous.
Sometimes that has meant picking fights in potentially
lucrative markets. Mr. Costolo in 2011 defended Twitter from U.K. authorities,
who blamed the service as a tool of rioters.
In a January interview, Mr. Costolo also said he wouldn't
comply with Chinese censorship. "We are not going to make the kinds of
sacrifices we might have to currently make for Twitter to be unblocked in
China," he said.
"This really illustrates how difficult some of the
growing pains can be when a company gets bigger and more established,"
said Marcia Hofmann, an attorney whose specialties include digital privacy.
"You have more at stake."
Twitter says it blocked 73 tweets in the first half of
the year based on government demands from Brazil, Russia and other countries—up
from zero in the first half of 2012. If a post is deemed illegal in one
country, Twitter continues to let users outside that country see the banned
posts. The majority of Twitter's users are outside the U.S.
Mr. Costolo said he knows the benefits and costs of
letting people post on Twitter anonymously—which Facebook doesn't permit.
"Doing so enables political speech in countries where political speech
isn't particularly welcome or worse," Mr. Costolo said. "We think
that's really important."
The unavoidable downside, Mr. Costolo said, is that
people sometimes tweet "horrible, disgusting revolting things."
To help counter abuse, Twitter several weeks ago started
letting users click on a single button to initiate a report about tweets they
believe are malicious. Some 40 employees review those claims.
At the end of July, Mr. Costolo was peppered with
questions on Twitter about fears the company was shutting down accounts
belonging to critics of Turkey's government.
Twitter says some people in Turkey are trying to silence
rivals by reporting them as spammers.
Mr. Costolo said Twitter is trying to quash bogus spam
reports that are politically motivated. Answering complaints, he wrote:
"We understand the importance of this public, live, conversational
platform across the world."
Write to Shira Ovide at shira.ovide@wsj.com
A version of this article appeared August 5, 2013, on
page B1 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Free
Speech a Test for Twitter.
Comments
Post a Comment