Twitter wrote to me this week, asking me to censor a tweet I posted saying that Israeli judge, Shamai Becker had been accused of sexually assaulting his daughter. Their request originated from a demand by the Israeli attorney general that Twitter censor the tweet because it allegedly violated a gag order in the case.
I told Twitter that I would not do so because the tweet was a truthful report based on Israeli media. I argued that Twitter should not censor the tweet because the government of the State of Israel had no right to extend the jurisdiction of Israeli law either to me or to U.S. companies.
Twitter replied earlier today with this disappointing message:
Dear Twitter User:
This is a follow-up to our correspondence, dated August 2, 2016, regarding your Twitter account, @richards1052.
In accordance with applicable law and our policies, Twitter is now withholding the following Tweet(s) in Israel.
השופט שמאי בקר חשוד בביצוע עבירות מין בבתו. צא"פ הוטל על זהותו
https://t.co/nj8UuAInSc— Tikun Olam 🍉 (@richards1052) May 18, 2016
For more information about withheld content, please review our Country Withheld Content policy page: https://support.twitter.com/articles/20169222.
We cannot provide legal advice. You may wish to contact your own attorney about this matter.
Sincerely,
Twitter calls this “withholding” its content. I know what I call it: censorship. They have permitted themselves to be intimidated by the State of Israel, whose officials refuse to honor freedom of expression and the press. They have dragged Twitter down to the low level of Israel.
Imagine this scenario: you are a public figure in your country and the police arrest you for a serious crime. Your lawyers obtain a gag order forbidding the media in your own country from associating your name with the charges. Then your lawyers approach the foremost legal officer of the State and demand that he use the full weight of the state to enforce domestic law in a foreign country. And the State, on your behalf, bullies a foreign company into doing so. I hope you can see the absurdity of this hypothetical case.
This is a slippery slope. Imagine every tin-pot dictator (or even a lowly street-sweeper) in the world finding hundreds or thousands of tweets which accuse him of crimes or misdeeds. The dictator succeeds in obtaining the judgment of a court that silences the media in his own country. After that, the State’s leading lawyer tells Twitter that they must censor all content that violates the laws of that country.
Twitter’s decision offers a field day for Erdogan or al-Sisi or Xi Jinping. They can now go to town cleaning up all the objectionable content on Twitter. And it could involve not just foreign leaders, but any average citizen who can avail himself of the laws of his land in this fashion. Anyone may object to anything tweeted about them. As long as you can get your nation’s legal officer to take up your cause, Twitter will have no recourse because this decision sets a precedent they can’t ignore.
Here’s another analogy to consider: Israeli media are not legally responsible for what readers post in the talkback section. This is also the case under U.S. law. But the Israeli attorney general is, in effect, arguing that Twitter is directly liable for whatever any of its users tweet which violates Israeli law. If Haaretz isn’t responsible for a comment posted which violates Israeli law, then why is Twitter?
“this decision sets a precedent they can’t ignore.” – don’t be so dramatic. This is the first time it happened to you, not the first time Twitter has done it.
And besides that – it is not extending any jurisdiction – the message you got said clearly it is being withheld “in Israel”. So, it is simply Israeli law being applied to Israel access to Twitter. Perspective, please.
@ OneIsraeli: Wrong, it is Israeli law being forced upon a foreign company. Israeli law has no jurisdiction over me or anything I write on Twitter. Twitter is based in the U.S. and all its operations are here as well. ANd this is something I hope to either litigate or strenuously represent to Twitter. Not only that, but it suppresses free speech inside Israel, which claims falsely it is a democracy. Democracy there is only skin deep, if that.
I would have less issue if I were Israeli, published the material inside Israel or were using an Israeli social media company based in Israel to publish to social media. But none of these are true.
@RichardSilverstein: Wrong. It is Israeli law being applied in the confines of the network blocks identified as being in Israel. And this is something I’d be curious to see you either litigate or strenuously represent to Twitter, because it is not the first time they do it and they’ll just shrug it off. Not only that but it follows the rule of the land, just like in every other place where gag orders exist, which is basically everywhere.
Twitter readers in Israel are subject to Israeli law, just like your “i would have less issue” example. You’re making a mountain out of a mole hill.
https://support.twitter.com/articles/18311
“Unlawful use: You may not use our service for any unlawful purposes or in furtherance of illegal activities. **International users agree to comply with all local laws regarding online conduct and acceptable content**.”
https://support.twitter.com/articles/20169222
“If you have encountered a Tweet or an account that has been marked as withheld, you may be wondering what that means and why that may have happened. With hundreds of millions of Tweets posted every day around the world, our goal is to respect our users’ expression, **while also taking into consideration applicable local laws**.
Many countries, including the United States, have laws that may apply to Tweets and/or Twitter account content. In our continuing effort to make our services available to users everywhere, if we receive a valid and properly scoped request from an authorized entity, it may be necessary to reactively withhold access to certain content in a particular country from time to time. […] We use the IP address from which you are viewing Twitter to determine your country.”
@ One Israeli: Wrong again. Twitter readers are not subject to Israeli law. Unless you want to argue that Israeli law has jurisdiction over how Israelis read and see. That would be pretty nifty to have not only mind control but state control of the senses of their subjects.
I am not an “international user.” I am an American user obeying all U.S. laws. I am not Israeli, not subject to Israeli law. Nor is Twitter. Twitter IS NOT subject to Israeli law. Period. Now, I would argue that Israelis who tweet from within Israel are in a different category. In that case, a stronger argument may be made that Twitter should agree to obey local law. But absolutely not in this case.
Good luck with your litigation then. These things tend to be short when the response is “read the terms of service you agreed to, and ask your lawyer to explain them to you again”.
You know, Richard, the obsessive refusal to admit one might be mistaken wears off pretty quick. Please don’t bother with the customary name calling and threats of me being done in this thread. I’ll take it as par for the course and happily move along.
@ Danny: As far as I know it is the first time an Israeli AG has demanded and succeeded in getting a major foreign social media platform to censor content produced outside Israel. That is a troubling precedent which you seem oblivious to.
Siena says
I do apologise profusely to you and I do hope I haven’t caused you any legal problems.
I have posted and commented on twitter about your article Charges of Sexual Misconduct Against Israeli Judge.
Truth to Power is important when those who are empowered to enforce laws are law breakers especially of a sensitive and heinous crime of sexual misconduct.
The Israeli AG and the judge are most concerned about publishing material in Hebrew in a major social media platform like Twitter. So I doubt you’ve caused any problems. In fact, I urge people to post about this matter as widely as possible.
The gag order is intended to protect the identity of the minor involved, and ignoring/hiding that fact is bad journalism and shows your agenda.
@Ran: pretending you’re protecting a rape victim by your letting her attacker off scot-free is a bizarre form of “protection.” Gag orders protect the perpetrator not the victim.
when the perpetrator is the father of the victim, exposing him exposes her.
i don’t agree with twitter, but you should have censored yourself in this case
@gg: Utter nonsense. Protecting her doesn’t protect her at all if he’s a sexual predator. It only permits him to continue raping her.
So if I’ve exposed her who is she? Neither you nor I know, as it should be.
“Who is she?” I dunno, maybe the daughter of Shamai Becker? Unless he has a hundred daughters, I think you’ve pretty much exposed her.
Aside for that, you clearly have no understanding of the application of state law to internet traffic into the state’s boundaries (see, e.g., the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006).
@ Chen: Disingenuous. “Who is she,” means can you identify her specifically. What is her name? How can you identify her? No one knows or cares. You still don’t know her name, nor do I.
As for your reference to internet gambling: tweets on Twitter are similar to internet gambling, how?
Your comment is so stupid that if you respond to this I will have you on a very, very short leash. I don’t mind intelligence comments that disagree with me. Yours aren’t.
Again, any person who knows now or will know in the future that Jane Doe is Shamai Becker’s daughter will also know that she was the alleged victim of sexual abuse by her father, even if all they ever read is this post. Do the kids at her school care? Do her neighbors? …
As to my reference to internet gambling, tweets on twitter are similar to internet gambling in that in both cases the transfer of information into and outside of a particular state can violate the state’s laws and subject a company facilitating the illegal activity to sanctions.
@Chen: Anyone starting a comment with “ahain” is either repeating him or herself or repeating someone else. Cardinal comment rule here: do NOT do that. Do not repeat.
Your comment says “anyone who knows now or will know in the future…” This girl is going to have to live with the trauma of what her father did to her whole life. The fact that a Hebrew tweet exists saying her father raped her will be the very least of her problems.
I care more about the 7 million Israelis who deserve to know a senior judge may’ve raped his daughter & gotten away with it; & that this judge’s rulings are now entirely compromised because the police & prosecutor helped protect him from justice, as they do so many other rapists whom they never pursue.
I care deeply for the welfare of this individual, which was why I never identified her. But I care even more fir the entire Israeli society which is prevented from knowing how rotten & fixed the system is.
The only people here who have obsessed about the issue of the girls privacy are right wing pro Israel hasbarati like you. When have you ever in your life done anything on behalf of rape victims or children suffering from domestic violence? Never. Which makes you & your hasbarati hypocrites.
Do not raise this issue again. At least three different commenters have raised the same issue & I don’t want you keep explaining why you’re wrong. Anyone who does, risks moderation.
Tweets have nothing whatsoever to do with Internet gambling. Gambling is state regulated commerce. Tweeting is not a commercial enterprise regulated by States. It is communication, not commerce. Pls stop pretending you’re a lawyer or know anything about law.
As a matter of courtesy, you should at least try to base your ad hominem on facts. “right wing pro Israel hasbarati” – this has nothing to do with being “right wing” or “pro Israel,” whatever that even means in this context. I was not defending the gag order, simply pointing out that violating it does have consequences for the girl. Your position that exposing the identity of the alleged molester here is more important is a reasonable one, worthy of debate, but we should not pretend that this has no effect on the victim, who is certainly identified by the revelation that her father is suspected of molesting his daughter.
The notion that communication, unlike “commerce”, is beyond state regulation is of course absurd.
You are certainly at liberty to “moderate” my comments; whatever you choose to do, however, I’d recommend trying to keep a more open mind.
Are you seriously arguing that minors who are the victims of sex crimes aren’t protected by this law? I think this is the lowest that anti-Israel trolls have ever gone. You are actually criticizing the State of Israel for seeking to protect a child from the stigma of sex abuse. And pretending that it’s about censoring criticism of the occupation?
Also, Twitter is a private company and can do whatever the hell it wants with your Tweets – Israeli law and jurisdiction have nothing to do with it. Israel asked them to do the decent thing because you were being a scumbag.
@ R5: Israel isn’t protecting a child. It could care less about Becker’s daughter. It is exploiting the daughter in order to protect the judge. It’s shameful & cynical as you are.
I never said this case was about “criticism of the occupation.” You did.
That’s a major comment rule violation. You get to hurl insults at me one time. Then you’re toast. As you are now.