Twitter's New Negative Capability

"Starting today," an unattributed Twitter blogger posted last Thursday, "we give ourselves the ability to reactively withhold content from users in a specific country — while keeping it available in the rest of the world." 

Lots of smart people have noticed this official corporate announcement. Two in particular are also watching the reactions. Venkat Balasubramani surfaces two key questions that are not being asked: "what kind of takedown requests will Twitter honor," and "will Twitter implement its policy only where it has people and offices?" Dave Winer reminds us that our affinity with Twitter is part of our larger complicity with the privatizing of the internet; at stake is "the ability to organize ourselves outside of the control of huge corporations and governments."

4589127062_67020ac0ec_b

I'd like to draw attention to the language of the majestic phrase, constructed in the royal first person plural, "we give ourselves the ability to reactively withhold content . . . "

"Ability" is well chosen. It denotes a policy choice for which the sovereign has conferred permission. It also suggests that a technical capability has been achieved. There is a sense that both the deliberation and the building may have been a long time coming.

To "withhold content" is a nice way of saying "to suppress" or "to censor." Ingeniously, "withhold content" still carries a connotation of neutrality, as in (to parody the regal voice) "we will withhold content until our people have settled their differences among themselves." Perhaps the most brilliant linguistic deployment here is the adverb, "reactively," which frankly acknowledges the euphemism it qualifies but effaces Twitter's agency: Twitter will censure, but its very ability to do so is predicated on the actions of a third party.

Words matter, if not always today, then in the permission they give tomorrow.

Consider this promotional language from a Facebook flyer, explaining its "sponsored stories" advertising product to prospective advertisers:

"The dynamic nature and unique algorithm behind each person’s News Feed means that each person’s experience is different on Facebook. For Page owners, this means that some of your fans do not see your valuable Page posts (status updates, videos, photos) in their News Feed. Sponsored Stories for Page Posts allows Page owners to ensure your fans see the content that your Page publishes."

This is what happens when euphemism becomes so practiced, what is signified loses color and all political charge. The last thing these words want to allow is the possibility that targeted advertising has gone too far in taking advantage of unsuspecting users.

I hope the obvious political aspect of Twitter's new ability will not turn out to have been cover for the privileging of corporate speech.

Image by Phillip Chapman-Bell.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Related Posts with Thumbnails