Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by throwaway6250 1839 days ago
For a bit more context (from the article)

Twitter's CEO Jack Dorsey personally donated money to groups organizing protests in Nigeria. Twitter also created a special emoji just for the protests.

2 comments

For a bit more context, the protests that Jack Dorsey donated to were against a police unit that regularly terrorised, extorted (ahem, robbed) and sometimes murdered young people based almost entirely on profiling such as "having locs" and "using an iPhone"[0].

0. For example this is as recently as two days ago: https://twitter.com/codebeast/status/1400423232189120521

> Twitter also created a special emoji just for the protests

Ooft. Although I know nothing of Nigerian politics, that seemed like a dumb move.

From the point of view of a European living in America the #ENDSARS protests looked very similarly motivated as the #BLM protests in America and Europe. #BLM got their own emoji, so why wouldn’t #ENDSARS?
Speaking as a Nigerian, somehow I'm not quite sure we're thought of as real communities with real people living real lives and not just a vague political blob on a map.

You also see this in many people's inability to mentally separate a government from its citizens - they themselves know that they don't fully agree with everything their own governments do (even the ones they like), but other places get treated as monoliths whose governments' actions and opinions are obviously completely representative and in the best interests of the whole.

Why does it seem like a dumb move?
Because Twitter is getting involved in politics. The US didn't like it when Russia got involved in its elections, so why is it ok for Twitter?
Explain how exactly Twitter (the company) was getting involved in Nigerian elections, please?
Censorship. World leaders won't be gagged by Jack Dorsey. India is next.
The government whose action you're commending quite literally has a history of arresting & detaining its critics, extorting & sometimes murdering its citizens in the street, supporting blasphemy laws, and blocking content and even financial transactions that it deems dissident (and those blocks are implemented with such a wide brush that plenty of completely unrelated sites often get caught in the net).

But of course, the real censorship is when a foreign social media platform that's used by a few percent of the population at maximum takes down a post.

It's always funny to see people cosplay at caring about censorship by...jumping to support the first actual authoritarian in sight.

And all that's beside the fact that this had nothing whatsoever to do with elections.

We are speaking of the platform that find it ok to ban a legally elected president because they disagreed with him politically. Twitter needs to be controlled more effectively to remain politically neutral, or they should register themselves as a political organization instead of pretending to be a business.