Man, Twitter takes anti-Semitism really, really seriously. Whoo boy, if you post something anti-Semitic on the social media site, well, you’re going to . . . lose your little blue check mark.
Two days after hatemonger Louis Farrakhan posted a rant on Twitter about “Satanic Jews” and the “Synagogue of Satan,” he no longer has the blue check mark that signifies his account has been “verified.” He’s still on the site, mind you, able to blast to his 481,000 followers, there’s just no check mark.
@LouisFarrakhan says it is the “Official Twitter Page of The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan.” In a video posted last week, he said: “I wonder will you recognize Satan? I wonder, will you see the Satanic Jew and the Synagogue of Satan, which has many races in it, because Satan has deceived the whole world, and think about the message that I was blessed by God to give you today,” he said on Wednesday.
“Think about what they’re gonna say when they have been so thoroughly and completely unmasked. Whenever you read that God has told the Jews to hear and obey, and they say, I hear and I disobey, that’s Satan,” he continued.
Farrakhan had a blue check mark as late as Friday, but now it’s gone.
That oughta’ teach him!
Twitter lists a slew of reasons why a verified account might lose its check mark. One that applies to Farrakhan — always has, always will — says the verification can be pulled for “promoting hate and/or violence against, or directly attacking or threatening other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease. Supporting organizations or individuals that promote the above.”
But Twitter hasn’t suspended Farrakhan’s account, and its terms say:
We believe in freedom of expression and open dialogue, but that means little as an underlying philosophy if voices are silenced because people are afraid to speak up. In order to ensure that people feel safe expressing diverse opinions and beliefs, we prohibit behavior that crosses the line into abuse, including behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another user’s voice.
Context matters when evaluating for abusive behavior and determining appropriate enforcement actions. Factors we may take into consideration include, but are not limited to whether:
the behavior is targeted at an individual or group of people;
the report has been filed by the target of the abuse or a bystander;
the behavior is newsworthy and in the legitimate public interest.
Huh. Abusive behavior targeted at a “group of people.” Seems to apply here.