As I understand this, a small group of lefties decide some conservative is racist, homophobic or whatever, flag them on Twitter for spamming, and the account is blocked. That sounds like par for the left as I understand it (like minded protestors have been disrupting campus speeches for decades), but here is what surprises me - what is going to happen when some party hack in Syria or Iran or China opens a few hundred accounts run by state loyalists and starts taking down on-line revolutionaries by flagging them for spam?
Is Twitter really going to aid in the auto-stifling of dissent? Sure sounds like it.
Captain Ed explains the benefits of the current self-policing system, but naturally that requires a level of restraint and self-discipline that we don't always associate with the internet.
That was the question buzzing on a corner of the blogosphere over the last few days, after several anti-Obama bloggers were unable to update their sites, which are hosted on Google’s Blogger service.
The bloggers in question, most of them supporters of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, and all of them opposed to Senator Obama, received a notice from Google last week saying that their sites had been identified as potential “spam” blogs. “You will not be able to publish posts to your blog until we review your site and confirm that it is not a spam blog,” the Google e-mail read.
Does anyone imagine Saul Alinsky would object? This is who they are, this is what they do.