15 years on, has Twitter done more harm than good in the Middle East?

Twitter has arguably become a toxic breeding ground for hate speech it has become, especially in the Arab world. (File/AFP)
Short Url
Updated 28 March 2021
Follow

15 years on, has Twitter done more harm than good in the Middle East?

  • Despite Twitter’s updated policy against hate speech, accounts that do just that are still present on the platform

LONDON: One week ago, Twitter’s staff worldwide were awarded a day off in celebration of the social networking platform’s 15th anniversary.

However, while they enjoyed the spoils of the company’s success, the same can’t be said for the many who have suffered from the barrage of negativity and harmful content the microblogging site has failed to counter time and again.

“They (Twitter) don’t dedicate as much effort to see that their own content is actually violating their own policies in Arabic, as they would in English, which is a big issue,” media researcher Azza Masri told Arab News.

Indeed, the platform has arguably become a toxic breeding ground for hate speech it has become, especially in the Arab world.

Despite Twitter’s updated policy on hate speech, which clearly states that users must “not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin,” accounts that do just that are still present on the platform.

“There is a definite laissez-faire attitude with the application or the enforcement of these community standards on Arabic language content, but also, any kind of non-English, or non-European language. That is an issue,” Masri said.

Accounts in the Arab world, such as those of exiled Egyptian cleric Yusuf Al-Qaradawi and terrorist-designated Qais Al-Khazali – both of whom have featured in Arab News’ Preachers of Hate series – remain active.

“Throughout history, God has imposed upon them (the Jews) people who would punish them for their corruption,” Al-Qaradawi said in one of many hate-filled fatwas.

“The last punishment was that of Hitler. This was a divine punishment for them. Next time, God willing, it will be done at the hands of the faithful believers,” he added.

Even accounts belonging to regular users with not a big following have been found to harass and abuse others online without having their tweets taken down immediately or soon enough.

In one instance highlighted by Masri, content doxing – revealing identity information about someone online – of a Lebanese individual from October 2019 still remained on Twitter despite repeated flags to the company’s policy teams.

Meanwhile a Twitter spokesperson told Arab News that “Increasing the health of the public conversation has been an essential focus area for years. If people don’t feel their conversations are safe from abuse and harassment, we know they won’t feel comfortable participating in the public conversation.”

“Our focus is in three key areas - product, policies and enforcement. We’ve simplified our rules, we’ve expanded our policy and enforcement to address the rise of misinformation around the world, and we’ve focused on enforcing our rules proactively.”

Not just Twitter, not just Arab world

The problem is not unique to accounts in the Arab world. In India, for example, social media platforms, including Facebook, have been continuously criticized for fostering space that allows users to spread hate speech.

“These platforms and these companies don’t take the measures to protect people or users – all of its users – from harm, then the work starts at the platform level, not at the user level,” Masri added.

BBC journalist and author, Gavin Esler, told Arab News: “If you have something on your platform, you in some way must be accountable for it.

“We’ve got these very, very big organizations who somehow claim that they are not responsible for the things that we get from them, which is just logically unacceptable to me,” he said.




This image posted by the office of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei on Twitter shows a figure of former US President Donald Trump playing golf under the shadow of a warplane alongside a pledge to avenge a deadly 2020 drone strike the former president ordered. (Twitter photo)

In early January, Twitter took measures and banned then-outgoing US President Donald Trump following the Capitol Hill riots for his tweets that were alleged to have incited violence from a mob of far-right protesters.

Although Twitter has a specific mandate for dealing with the accounts of world leaders, it insists they are not immune to its enforcement policies. Yet some continue to tweet and post comments considered objectionable – and even dangerous – by many.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, for example, cannot be compared to Trump in terms of number of followers or reach on Twitter, but his activity on the platform follows a similarly dangerous pattern.

In January, Khamenei posted false claims across his multiple accounts – in English, Spanish, Farsi, Arabic, and Russian – that coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines developed in the US and the UK were “completely untrustworthy,” that France had “HIV-tainted blood supplies,” and it was “not unlikely that they (Western countries) would want to contaminate other nations.”

This followed years of similarly dangerous and damaging tweets in which Khamenei incited violence against other nations. In May last year, he said that Iran would “support and assist any nation or any group anywhere who opposes and fights the Zionist regime.”

And the list goes on. Lebanon’s deputy speaker of parliament, Elie Ferzli, recently used offensive language to respond to a tweet criticizing him.

Even in the US, the platform has become a space for company leaders to indirectly threaten employees, with the country’s National Labor Relations Board on Friday finding that a 2018 tweet from Tesla CEO Elon Musk unlawfully threatened workers with loss of stock options if they chose to be represented by the United Auto Workers union.

Way forward?

Regardless of Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms’ claims that they only act as content aggregators rather than content producers, the problem remains.

“That’s like saying any kind of news organization is just an aggregator of all the stuff that various journalists happen to want to have (on their sites). Facebook makes it sound as if it is some kind of urinal, in which case people pee in every so often,” Esler added.

Russia recently acted and threatened to block Twitter for one month if the social media giant failed to remove banned content, which included the suicide of minors and indecent images of children, as well as information on drug use.

While the platform has complied and started taking down the content, Russia’s state regulator Roskomnadzor argued that the speed of removal was “unsatisfactory,” given that two-thirds of all demands were still being ignored.

In a statement, the regulator said: “Roskomnadzor reported that, after the adoption of measures to slow Twitter traffic on March 10, the social network began work on removing content banned in Russia, but only one-third. The rate at which the social network deletes banned information is unsatisfactory.

“We regret that only the use of technical enforcement measures to enforce Russian laws forced the American social network to recognize the existence of information that is absolutely evil in all countries of the world, and to take measures to remove it.”

Actions such as these, as well as Australia’s bitter standoff with Facebook over a proposed law that would force it to pay news publishers for content, have sparked fierce debate over the ethical standpoint of these platforms – namely when it comes to freedom of speech.

Esler said: “Nobody has the freedom of speech in a crowded theater to shout bomb or fire, that’s not freedom of speech.”


TikTok says it’s in the process of restoring service to US users

Updated 19 January 2025
Follow

TikTok says it’s in the process of restoring service to US users

  • TikTok thanks Donald Trump, who says he plans to give TikTok’s China-based parent company more time to find an approved buyer
  • Popular video-sharing platform went dark in US in response to new law

NEW YORK: TikTok says it’s “in the process” of restoring service to users in the United States after the popular video-sharing platform went dark in response to a new law.
The company that runs TikTok said in a post on X on Sunday that tech companies that faced fines if they didn’t remove TikTok’s app from the digital stores and other service providers had agreed to help.
TikTok thanked President-elect Donald Trump, who on Sunday said he planned to sign an executive order after his inauguration on Monday to give TikTok’s China-based parent company more time to find an approved buyer before the popular video-sharing platform is subject to a permanent USban.
It was not immediately clear whether TikTok was working as it did before the company instituted a blackout late Saturday. Some users reported that the app was working, and TikTok’s website appeared to be functioning for at least some users. However, the app remained unavailable for download on Apple’s app store.
Google and Apple removed the app from their digital stores to comply with a federal law that required them to do so if TikTok parent company ByteDance didn’t sell its US operation by Sunday. The law, which passed with wide bipartisan support in April, allowed for steep fines for non-compliance.
TikTok said Trump’s promise of an executive order had provided “the necessary clarity and assurance to our service providers that they will face no penalties providing TikTok to over 170 million Americans and allowing over 7 million small businesses to thrive.”


US Navy veteran evacuating Afghans wins $5m in CNN defamation suit

Updated 18 January 2025
Follow

US Navy veteran evacuating Afghans wins $5m in CNN defamation suit

  • The settlement will avert a second phase of the trial that would have determined any punitive damages

WASHINGTON: CNN reached a settlement on Friday with a US Navy veteran who helped evacuate people from Afghanistan after the US military withdrew from the country in 2021, a judge said on Friday, hours after a jury found the TV news outlet liable for defaming him.

The six-person jury decided CNN had to pay damages totaling $5 million. The settlement will avert a second phase of the trial that would have determined any punitive damages. The verdict followed a two-week trial in Panama City, Florida, state court.

Circuit Judge William Henry did not provide details of the deal in announcing the settlement in open court.

Plaintiff Zachary Young sued CNN in 2022, accusing the Warner Bros Discovery unit of destroying his reputation in a segment on “The Lead with Jake Tapper” by branding him as a profiteer who exploited desperate Afghans by charging exorbitant fees.

CNN stood by its story and denied defaming Young, though the network said in March 2022 that it regretted using the term “black market” to describe Young’s work.

A CNN representative said the network remains proud of its journalists but “will of course take what useful lessons we can from this case.” The representative declined to offer details of the deal.

Young’s lawyer Vel Freedman said in a statement that he was very pleased to clear Young’s name, obtain punitive damages and settle the case.

Young, wearing a dark suit and blue tie, smiled as Henry thanked the lawyers for their work before dismissing them.

The case stems from Young’s work as a security consultant helping corporations and charities extract people from Afghanistan after the Taliban swiftly took back control following the chaotic US withdrawal.

In a segment on The Lead, CNN said “desperate Afghans” trying to escape the country were being “exploited” with “exorbitant” and “impossible” fees charged for evacuations.

The segment turned to focus on Young, displaying his name and photo next to a chyron saying evacuees faced a perilous “black market.”

“The sum and substance of the segment states and implies that Young marketed evacuations directly to Afghan citizens, that he exploited Afghan citizens, and that he sold them illegal goods/services on a black market,” Young said in his lawsuit.


TikTok ban: Last-minute reprieve or rule of law?

Updated 17 January 2025
Follow

TikTok ban: Last-minute reprieve or rule of law?

  • As the Jan. 19 deadline looms for TikTok’s potential ban in the US, rumors are rife speculating on the future of the video app

DUBAI/LONDON: With just days left until the official ban of Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok is set to take effect in the US, speculation is mounting over what happens next — and whether there could still be a last-minute twist.

The short answer: No one knows for certain.

In March 2024, the US House of Representatives passed a bill that, if signed into law, would force ByteDance, the China-based owner of TikTok, to sell the video-sharing app. The Senate passed the bill, and President Joe Biden signed it, ordering ByteDance to sell TikTok to an American company or face a ban in the US by Jan. 19.

At the time, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew said that such a law “will take billions of dollars out of the pockets of creators and small businesses” and put more than 30,000 American jobs at risk.

Neither he nor the company were willing to give up without a fight. In May 2024, TikTok and ByteDance sued the US federal government challenging the law, alleging that it was unconstitutional.

In December, a federal appeals court ruled the TikTok law was constitutional. A month later, on Jan. 10, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a pivotal case brought by TikTok and its users challenging the law on the basis of US users’ First Amendment rights.

On Friday, the Supreme Court upheld the TikTok ban after days of speculation, during which it refrained from making public comments on the case, leaving a sliver of hope for a last-minute reprieve. With the decision now confirmed, TikTok’s options have significantly narrowed.

In its ruling, the court stated: “We conclude that the challenged provisions do not violate petitioners’ First Amendment rights. The judgment of the United States court of appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is affirmed.”

This decision means TikTok will no longer be available for download from app stores starting Jan. 19.

“There is no doubt that, for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok offers a distinctive and expansive outlet for expression, means of engagement, and source of community. But Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary,” the ruling reads.

The outcome seemed increasingly likely during the hearings, with Justice Elena Kagan saying: “The law is only targeted at this foreign corporation that doesn't have First Amendment rights. Whatever effect it has, it has.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett added: “The law doesn’t say TikTok has to shut down. It says ByteDance has to divest.”

Amid the legal back and forth, TikTok’s knight in shining armor might just be President-elect Donald Trump, who is set to take office on Jan. 20 — one day after the purported ban.

Despite trying to ban the app during his first term over national security concerns, he joined TikTok during his 2024 presidential campaign, during which he pledged to “save TikTok.” He also lauded the platform for helping him win more youth votes.

When asked about his policies on social media regulation, particularly the impending ban of TikTok, Karoline Leavitt, Trump-Vance Transition Team spokeswoman, told Arab News: “The American people re-elected President Trump by a resounding margin, giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail. He will deliver.”

Just last month, Trump urged the Supreme Court to pause the ban.

The brief submitted to the court says Trump “alone possesses the consummate dealmaking expertise, the electoral mandate, and the political will to negotiate a resolution to save the platform while addressing the national security concerns expressed by the Government.”

Moreover, earlier this week, reports emerged that TikTok CEO Chew has been invited to Trump’s inauguration and offered a “position of honor,” suggesting a willingness to engage with the company.

And Mike Waltz, Trump’s incoming national security adviser, told FOX News that the new administration would “find a way to preserve (TikTok) but protect people’s data.”

Any intervention by Trump, however, would likely take the form of an executive order temporarily pausing the ban, contingent on TikTok demonstrating progress toward separating from ByteDance. Even then, such an order could face legal challenges, and the law only allows a limited delay of 60 to 90 days to give extra time for negotiations.

Outgoing President Biden, who will leave office on Jan. 19, will not enforce a ban on TikTok, a US official said Thursday, leaving its fate in the hands of Trump.

Rumors of a potential sale have intensified in recent days including speculation of interest from high-profile buyers, such as Elon Musk, but ByteDance dismissed these reports as “pure fiction.”

The company has consistently rejected the possibility of a sale, saying it “is simply not possible: not commercially, not technologically, not legally.”

As the Jan. 19 deadline approaches, the situation remains shrouded in uncertainty, even after Friday’s ruling.

For now, TikTok’s chances of remaining accessible in the US appear practically null, as the case is steeped in complex issues of politics, national security, economic interests, and digital rights.

The law underpinning the ban targets a wide network of US-based partners that facilitate TikTok’s operations, effectively making common workarounds, such as using virtual private networks or changing a phone’s regional settings, either ineffective or impractical, according to experts.

At best, users might gain limited access to a web-based version of the app, which lacks many of its features. However, even that option may not function reliably, experts warned.

The most likely enforcement mechanism would involve compelling app stores like Google Play and Apple’s App Store to remove TikTok from their platforms in the US. Lawmakers have already instructed tech companies to prepare for this scenario if the ban is enacted.

If the app is banned, TikTok reportedly plans to display a pop-up message for users attempting to access the platform, directing them to a website with information about the ban, according to a Reuters report citing sources close to the matter.

For now, TikTok’s operations continue as usual, with the company having reassured employees that their jobs are secure regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision. However, morale within the company is said to be low, despite these reassurances.

What is certain is that TikTok’s leadership has been “planning for various scenarios.” With Friday’s decision now final and the Jan. 19 ban imminent, the company’s next steps will likely take one of two paths: intervention by Trump or divestment to a non-Chinese entity.

Meanwhile, users and critics alike wait in anticipation, seeking clarity on the far-reaching consequences of the ban — potentially rippling as far as the Middle East — and whether any last-minute developments might offer a reprieve for the platform and its millions of US users.


London’s pro-Palestine demo set for standoff as police-approved route rejected

Updated 18 January 2025
Follow

London’s pro-Palestine demo set for standoff as police-approved route rejected

  • Organizers say they will assemble at Whitehall on Saturday to protest the police ban on their original demonstration route
  • Police ban on the original gathering at the BBC headquarters, citing a potential threat to the Jewish community, has sparked backlash

LONDON: Tensions are rising ahead of a planned pro-Palestine demonstration in London after the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and its coalition partners vowed to reject the Metropolitan Police’s proposed new route for the march.

Organizers have announced they will gather at Whitehall on Saturday to protest the police decision instead.

PSC, alongside Stop the War, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the Muslim Association of Britain, Friends of Al-Aqsa, and the Palestine Forum in Britain, made the announcement on Friday following protracted negotiations with police.

The Met had last week banned the original march, which was scheduled to start at the BBC’s headquarters, citing its proximity to a synagogue and potential security concerns.

“Despite intensive efforts to reach a compromise with the Met, it has so far refused to accept or offer a reasonable solution,” said the coalition in a statement. “However, we will assemble on Whitehall on Saturday at noon. We reiterate our call on the police to lift their repressive conditions and allow us to march. If they continue to refuse to do so and prevent us from marching, we will be rallying in Whitehall to protest.”

The controversy erupted after the police revoked the pre-approved march route, which had been announced in November, over claims it could pose a threat to the Jewish community.

Organizers described the decision as “discriminatory” and accused the authorities of bowing to political pressure from pro-Israeli groups.

“The Met has seemingly accepted and acted upon the arguments of pro-Israel groups that seek to delegitimise our protest as antisemitic or a threat to Jewish people,” said PSC Director Ben Jamal. “This is a gross distortion of the truth. There is not a single instance of our marches posing any threat to synagogues or Jewish individuals. Indeed, we count a large, self-organised Jewish bloc as some of our most indefatigable supporters.”

Organizers also said they offered to reroute the march to avoid clashing with Shabbat services at the synagogue, but claimed the police refused their proposals.

“Over the past week the Met Police have imposed a series of repressive conditions to prevent us marching and have even attempted to impose a route that the Board of Deputies of British Jews announced they had suggested to the police. This has been firmly rejected by the Palestine Coalition — it is an affront that pro-Israel groups can attempt to decide where we can or cannot march,” read the group’s statement.

On Friday, the coalition said that while they plan to defy the ban, they would gather at Whitehall instead of the BBC’s Portland Place headquarters. They also claimed the police had backed away from plans to arrest protesters assembling outside Russell Square, which the Met had suggested as a designated protest zone.

The police’s decision has drawn widespread criticism, with several cultural figures and members of the Jewish community urging the authorities to reverse the ban.

“The Met’s approach has been confrontational, heavy-handed and intransigent. Their use of powers under the Public Order Act has been based on flimsy grounds and arbitrarily applied, which erodes the right of peaceful protest that is fundamental in a democracy,” Jamal said. “Despite this, our protest tomorrow will go ahead — we call on all those who seek justice for Palestine to stand with us.”


Lebanese journalist appointed presidency spokesperson

Updated 17 January 2025
Follow

Lebanese journalist appointed presidency spokesperson

  • Charafeddine is one of two women appointed to the president’s team

DUBAI: Lebanese journalist Najat Charafeddine has been appointed as spokesperson for the presidency, the first woman to hold such a position.

Charafeddine is one of two women appointed to the president’s team, an unprecedented move announced a week after the election of Lebanese President Joseph Aoun.

Diplomat Jeanne Mrad, who serves at Lebanon’s permanent mission to the United Nations, has been appointed as an adviser for diplomatic affairs at the presidency.

The appointments were hailed by the Lebanese media as a step toward empowering women on the political scene.

Charafeddine, a native of the southern Lebanese town of Taybeh in the Marjeyoun district, holds a bachelor’s degree in communication and media studies from the Lebanese University, and lectured for three years at Antonine University.

She started her career at Future TV, where she worked for 20 years between 1993 and 2013. She first appeared to the public as a news anchor before hosting the programs “Why Taif?” and “Transit.”

Her success in Lebanon paved the way for international reporting. She covered the wars in Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003) as a correspondent for Future TV. Charafeddine also reported on several international conferences and participated in political and media forums in Washington, London, Jordan, Tunisia, Morocco, and other countries.

In 2015, Charafeddine moved to Al-Araby TV, where she hosted programs such as “Arab Neighbors” and “Special Dialogue” until 2018. Later, she continued her career in radio, presenting the political program “Sunday Encounter” on Voice of All Lebanon radio.

In addition to her broadcast work, Sharafeddine has written articles for publications such as As-Safir, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, and Al-Shiraa magazine.

She is the wife of former Finance Minister Ghazi Wazni, who was chosen by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri in the government of Hassan Diab.