The definition of "extremist"

There was one news item today which I decided to leave to a separate post. 

From Reuters:

Web giants YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Microsoft will step up efforts to remove extremist content from their websites by creating a common database.

Extremist?

"We hope this collaboration will lead to greater efficiency as we continue to enforce our policies to help curb the pressing global issue of terrorist content online," the companies said in a statement on Tuesday.

So JUST content from terrorists?

Consider this:

The companies will share 'hashes' - unique digital fingerprints they automatically assign to videos or photos - of extremist content they have removed from their websites to enable their peers to identify the same content on their platforms.

And then this:

But many providers have relied until now mainly on users to flag content that violates terms of service. Flagged material is then individually reviewed by human editors who delete postings found to be in violation.

Twitter suspended 235,000 accounts between February and August this year and has expanded the teams reviewing reports of extremist content. 

In summary, it takes one person to be offended by you, and a human editor to agree, and you can potentially be blacklisted by all the major websites.

On the bright side:

Each company will decide what image and video hashes to add to the database and matching content will not be automatically removed, they said.

However, knowing big companies, I tend to doubt there will be much disagreement.

By the way, guess who we have to thank for this violation of free speech rights?

The European Union set up an EU Internet Forum last year bringing together the internet companies, interior ministers and the EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator to find ways of removing extremist content.

Before you say, "But this is just to fight terrorists?" Remember, the Founding Fathers would have been considered terrorists by today's standards.

Mind you, I am not suggesting we support terrorists in any way. But if they feel free to communicate, it just might make them a bit easier to find. Free speech can be ugly, but it also can be revealing. It let's us know who the idiots and the crazies are in the world.  

What worries me is HOW we define "extremist"? Today, it may be terrorists. Tomorrow, it could be any of us.

I am reminded of the poem known as "First they came", by Pastor Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist. 

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist. 

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew. 

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

While this poem may have been specifically about Germans who said nothing in the face of rising Nazi power, it needs to be remembered that history may not repeat, but it often rhymes. It doesn't have to be something as obvious as Nazis stealing our right to free speech.

But the irony is rich that it is the Europeans leading the charge to steal our right to free speech.