A major source of contention between activists and Twitter is the (​rather accurate) perception that Twitter thinks it's remaining neutral by refusing to take action on hate speech and gendered abuse. Friedman and Chemaly vehemently disagree with this view of free speech. They both maintain that refusing to take a stance on harassment allows it to proliferate, effectively silencing marginalized communities.
This is the easiest and most laziest way to "go with the flow". Doing nothing effectively lets the network grow without the risk of betting on the wrong horse. Twitter protects their interests when it comes to abuse of their safe guards, but when it comes to taking on harassment and abuse, they couldn't care less, it doesn't effect them.
This is the easiest and most laziest way to "go with the flow". Doing nothing effectively lets the network grow without the risk of betting on the wrong horse. Twitter protects their interests when it comes to abuse of their safe guards, but when it comes to taking on harassment and abuse, they couldn't care less, it doesn't effect them.