Is Twitter Suppressing Discussion Of WikiLeaks?

By on December 8, 2010 in News 2

Ah the irony: social networking sites were heralded as the savior of democracy, transparency, and change — but perhaps that’s only the case when the villain is conveniently a U.S. enemy such as Iran.

Today, there are growing grumblings that Twitter is attempting to suppress the spread of WikiLeaks discussion by removing it from “trending topics” lists. Starting with a volcanic surge in popularity on November 28, the hashtag #WikiLeaks has been white-hot on Twitter. And yet, it hasn’t made a blip on Twitter’s Trends list, which has been occupied by far less popular topics. Has Twitter caved to anti-WikiLeaks pressure à la PayPal and Mastercard? There’s a full explanation at Student Analysis.

wikileaks-180

, , , ,

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    It isn’t even really a question. It’s an absolute. Even new mediums that have BECOME conventional are under pressure to combat Wikileaks support…and its very telling that the more financial success a medium has enjoyed, the more likely it is to be on the governments side against Wikileaks. This tells us a lot about the nature of vested interest over ethics.

    It is absolutely criminal that organizations have made so many efforts, discrete and concrete alike, to disrupt the support that millions of people clearly feel for Assange’s organization. Why does that support exist? Because we are lied to regularly and we know it…and because we know equally well that this is becoming the fight to end transparency and media freedom. There is only one side to be on…and whether you like Wikileaks or not…the other choice is surrendering your right to even voice an unpopular opinion in the future. If the medium can be closed to alternative views and controversial statements…it will stay closed to them ever after…and its worth supporting Wikileaks to prevent that future from becoming a reality.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    It isn’t even really a question. It’s an absolute. Even new mediums that have BECOME conventional are under pressure to combat Wikileaks support…and its very telling that the more financial success a medium has enjoyed, the more likely it is to be on the governments side against Wikileaks. This tells us a lot about the nature of vested interest over ethics.

    It is absolutely criminal that organizations have made so many efforts, discrete and concrete alike, to disrupt the support that millions of people clearly feel for Assange’s organization. Why does that support exist? Because we are lied to regularly and we know it…and because we know equally well that this is becoming the fight to end transparency and media freedom. There is only one side to be on…and whether you like Wikileaks or not…the other choice is surrendering your right to even voice an unpopular opinion in the future. If the medium can be closed to alternative views and controversial statements…it will stay closed to them ever after…and its worth supporting Wikileaks to prevent that future from becoming a reality.