Tue, Aug 22, 2017 - Page 9 News List

Technology companies, few in number, wield too much power

By Stephen Carter  /  Bloomberg View

The Daily Stormer is finally off the Internet. Well, the public Internet anyway.

Last week, the hate-spewing white supremacist site lost its domain name registration when it was kicked off first GoDaddy and then Google for violating terms of its contracts.

Activists had been trying for years to get the Stormer suspended. After the site’s vicious post attacking Heather Heyer, the protester who was killed in Charlottesville, Virginia, the domain registrars decided they had had enough.

The site relaunched on a Russian server, but swiftly vanished from that host too. Now the Stormer exists only with an anonymous “.onion” address on the Tor network. Good luck tracking it down.

Meanwhile, a Twitter campaign naming the companies that provide the Daily Stormer with various Web services has deprived the site of Web security, cloud computing and other technology.

The fury of the techies, once aroused, is awesome to behold. Tech companies ranging from Airbnb to Reddit and Facebook, Inc have been purging other perceived supremacists from the ranks of their users.

The libertarian part of me ought to be fine with all of this. Apart from the most exceptional circumstances, such as invidious discrimination, a business should be free to contract with whom it pleases, and I will shed no tears for the Daily Stormer, which fully earned its expulsion from rational discourse.

One might protest — correctly — that there is a lot of evil in the world, but history teaches that Nazis and white supremacists are a special case. When their views vanish, we will all be better off for it.

However, I find myself troubled. For one thing, as tech columnist Will Oremus pointed out in online Slate Magazine, the same companies being told that they should not serve all comers made essentially the opposite argument in their campaign during former US president Barack Obama’s administration to defeat the Stop Online Piracy Act.

Having decided that they can pick and choose customers, the tech companies will be ill-placed to reverse field should the US Congress once more try to crack down on them for hosting sites that make unlicensed use of intellectual property.

Moreover, it is worrisome that so many activists are cheering the demise of the Daily Stormer not on the narrow ground that white supremacy is a special case, but on the more general ground that groups promoting “hatred” should have no place on the Web.

Given the contemporary left’s broad and wondrously flexible definition of the word “hate,” the implications of that particular slogan — calling it an argument would be too charitable — are unsettling.

The triumphal tumult on social media naturally leads one to wonder which groups that progressives deem wrong on the issues might be the subject of the next banning campaign.

This leads to my largest concern: Libertarians tend to worry about concentrations of power in the hands of the state. There is no consensus about the danger of concentrations of power in private hands, but when the private hands in question control access to the principal media of communication in the world, one has to hesitate when they decide that not everyone should be granted entree, for the power they are exercising is almost state-like.

My concern is not with the neo-Nazis, who fully deserve both their opprobrium and their sudden Internet obscurity, and there is nothing new in using the refusal to deal as a tool for enforcing social conformity. I am old enough to remember signs in store windows barring boys whose hair was too long and women whose skirts were too short.

This story has been viewed 1986 times.

Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.

TOP top