Dear Twitter: You Can Suck Our Cock!

Dear Twitter:

What the fuck is wrong with you guys? We mean, what is seriously fucking wrong with you? You operate out of San Francisco, California, the purported home of the free and open society, just bring your roller skates and wings — clothing optional, yet you go out of your way to stifle and suppress speech as a professional endeavor, as has been well established. The most recent case in point involves us.

Recently, you banned our organization, Obscene News, from advertising on your site. And while we primarily aggregate news from other sites, including several major news organizations, and despite the fact that our content is not constitutionally “obscene” (our name is meant to be ironic in light of the constitutional jurisprudence regarding obscenities), the purported reason for your prohibition is that our content is somehow “offensive, vulgar, or obscene,” as shown in the following image of your response to our inquiry:

The first problem with your response is that your staff is too fucking lazy to even fill in the name of our account. Wow! A word of advice, if you’re going to regulate speech, at least demonstrate that you can read, comprehend and comply with simple, written directions like “insert Account/Tweet.” But we guess that your inability to do so is to be expected from a site that can only handle 280 characters at a time. Your failure to include the name of our account makes us seriously question whether you actually reviewed our account at all, which would make your response deceitful if you did not. And did we mention that you had no problem taking our money for the last three month and that you have failed to refund the money we paid toward a promotion that you canceled?  Who does that? You’re a bunch of scandalous assholes. Advertisers beware.

The second problem with your review is that our content is excepted under the following portion of your policy, including, but not limited to, the exception for news:

We told you this, but apparently, you don’t know your own policy, and probably because you can’t read or because it exceeds 280 characters. See our first point.

The third problem with your review is that your policy is ambiguous in that the terms offensive, vulgar, and obscene are themselves ambiguous and therefore subject to arbitrary enforcement.

For example, some people will likely find this image offensive, vulgar, or obscene:

And some people will likely find this image offensive, vulgar, or obscene:

And while we could give a million other examples, we would hate to print anything that you might consider offensive, vulgar, or obscene, whatever the fuck that means.

Now please inform, are you so wise that you can determine when something is offensive, vulgar, or obscene? You clearly believe that you can, and that’s why you’re really fucking stupid, as wisdom would understand the danger that comes with adjudging the content of speech.

And that’s why these guys decided content neutrality was good policy:

You really should be more like those guys, but again, to understand them, you’d have to be capable of reading more than 280 characters at a time.

Twitter, you can suck our cock!

LATEST POSTS