David vs Hinkle - Slingstones against a Social Media Goliath?
There is an escalating war of words emerging on Twitter/x between Dr. Eli David (PHD) and Jackson Hinkle . Dr. David and Hinkle have taken up diametrically opposed positions on Israel's response to Hamas, and Israel's military response within Gaza. Hinkle is a mid 20's social media influencer, that has seen a somewhat inexplicable meteoric rise, engaging in provocative and performative dissidence. Hinkle seems to have a talent at utilizing social media to position himself in the midst of trending subjects, and using incendiary commentary to capture attention. On his website, Dr. David describes himself as " a leading AI expert specializing in deep learning and evolutionary computation". Over the past few years Dr. David has positioned himself as a significant influencer on Twitter and other forums.
Dr. David has used his platform in recent weeks to advocate for Israel in the week of Hamas's terroristic attacks on Israel and to condemn actions or speech, the he (Dr. David) perceives as anti-Semitic. Hinkle simultaneously has positioned himself as a champion of the Palestinians, and populates his Twitter feed with a steady stream of startlingly painful images from Gaza, quotes from leaders critical of Israel, and Jackson's own criticism of Israel and Zionism. Because of the viral and converging nature of Twitter, it was algorithmically inevitable the Dr. David and Jackson would come into contact and conflict with each other - and Dr David has recently called on Elon Musk to remove Jackson Hinkle from the platform. Dr. David asserts that "people (will) be killed ... " because of Jackson's speech and judges Twitter will have some culpability for platforming him.
What Are or Should be The Limits of Discourse on Social Media?
Corporate social media platforms creates their own terms of service for permissible speech, and are nominally governed by the prevailing rules of the countries in which they operate. These platforms derive their operating revenue from subscriptions and advertisements - and are subject to influence or pressure from these vectors. Jackson is a United States Citizen, Dr. David appears to be an Israeli National from his biographical sources.
Is it better for offensive speech to be broadly or openly discussed on Twitter - where bad arguments can be refuted by reason and moral clarity? Or should offensive voices be banished from large platforms?
Questions...
The question then becomes, who decides what is intolerably offensive?
What freedoms should we surrender for the promise of safety, or the potential of averting harm?
Is Dr. David correct - that Jackson's speech will provoke or incite murder or violence? I can not adequately answer this question in a substantive form. Certainly Jackson's post are saturated with emotionally wrenching images, and repetitive material that could be interpreted as propaganda. Discerning if a Twitter post was a significant causative force for violence act is (in most cases) beyond any tool or capacity I have to measure with surety.
Is Jackson a Cultural Dissident or a Manufactured Performer
Earlier this week I wanted to test certain intuitions. I made similar posts on Jackson's and Dr. David Twitter forums, asking about the limits of free speech - focusing on the positive aspect that - the freedom of discourse allows us to make better arguments, or persuasive moral arguments. On Dr. David's feed I was inundated with comments, generally positive - with some smattering of the reactionary anger that is inseparable from social media. On Jackson's feed - it was virtually silent - with almost no interaction. This seems characteristic of Jackson's posts though there is little organic discussion in the comments and response under his main posts. Commenters seem to repeat the same themes, and don't typically explore or challenge the ideas present.
This struck me as unusual given the claim that Hinkle is the most viral account on Twitter. Hinkle does participate frequently in live audio events on Twitter, his YouTube account was removed recently, his videos views on Rumble seem substantially lower than I expected based on the size of his Twitter presence. It may be that Hinkle's following is overstated and that his posts are rather simply being utilized as aggregations points for Twitter users sympathetic to his themes.
I went to 4Chan (Don't Do this at Home)
Curious about Hinkle - I started looking at other dissident or irreverent voices - browsing through Twitter for instance while the America First segment and Groypers often echo similar sentiments as Hinkle, there seems to be minimal crossover to his material. In depth Twitter analytics could no doubt reveal the demographics and geographical characteristics of Hinkle's audience.
I think went to 4Chan's /pol "politically incorrect" site - a raucous place with no respect or reservations about anyone's particular sensibilities. While the audience there is often contemptuous of "e-celebrities" like Jackson Hinkle, if someone is resonating with popular culture they tend to get discussed there - I was surprised when doing a search that there was no mention of Jackson in recent discussion. Using the internal search results provide zero results. Domain searches using Duck Duck Go and other search engines lead to similar results. Jackson Hinkle is an anomaly. While Twitter is a social media juggernaut, in many ways it is distortionary - and we see reactionary but somewhat sanitized versions of discussions that are happening with more intensity in private websites or Telegram channels. Jackson may be more of a side effect or a performative trend surfer than an effectual thought leader.bold
Parting Thoughts:
Intuitively I believe we should err on the side of free discussion in the broadest sense. This is why I am writing this article on InLeo.io - a free speech platform built on the Hive Blockchain. Speech should be free and it should be meaningful. Speech can certainly have consequences, when bullets are fired and rockets are flying - and one's family's members are in harms way - there is no desire for nuance or equivocation.
I will not offer any moral opination about the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The suffering on both sides has likely just begun, and I pray what ever happens in the days and weeks to come will spare the innocent and not spread to engulf the world in wider war and misery.
Posted Using InLeo Alpha
