Seems like an awful lot of the 'internet hate speech' cliches in one long article here. Talk about Bernie Bros, about right wing extremism, about Twitter not enforcing its rules, etc. All it needed were some calls to 'censor' the internet, and it'd have been perfect.<p>Not saying there aren't horrible people on Twitter and other social networks, and that personal attacks don't happen, but it's been a somewhat tired subject for articles recently and pushed like its the end of the world by the press.
On another note, I found a more interesting comment about quitting Twitter from someone with a similar amount of followers that I used to follow on the site. They said they quit because it became an addition that took up more and more of their time and drove them to become a more and more negative person in general.<p>I'd say that would make a somewhat more interesting article to read about Twitter and why people might quit.
I understand his frustrations, but that's simply the way the internet is. A similar effect can be seen on Reddit - visit /r/worldnews and scroll through the comments on any article to see what I mean.<p>What I don't see is why this is worthy of an article on the NY Times. You left Twitter for various reasons, none of which are newsworthy.<p>Also, I don't understand how Bernie supporters are misogynists for criticizing Hillary.
Look, I don't want go victim blame and it is pretty difficult for me to conclude the fault was with the author. He didn't deserve to be treated that way because of his beliefs, cultural heritage, ect. However, this article is meta-example of how not to deal with this. First, it's the internet, so private anonymous people can effortlessly target you and repeatedly avoid bans. Intellectually though, I can't conclude there were real threats. This is why we don't feed trolls or negotiate with terrorists.<p>Sure twitter could curb free speech (even hate speech) but probably millions of tweets a day prove Godwin's law. You really should not take out a massive article in the times to tell them they won. You shouldn't leave a platform and stand aside for shit like this.<p>This article hurts twitter, and free speech while telling trolls that they won, in the <i>The New York Times</i>. So I am mad and blaming him for his <i>reaction</i> because now they have more incentive and everyone else is worse off. Some of these trolls are probably Jewish. They care about fucking with people in a low effort way. What the author has done here is garuntee they continue to say annoying shit on the internet. I love the internet, and it is filled with utter garbage, so it would be nice that after I wade through spam wordpress sites I didn't have to read an article praising them(that is how they see it).<p>Don't feed trolls. Put on the settings that only let certain people tweet at you, ect, and actually stand up for free speech because the press needs it more than ever. Twitter has shadowbanning functionality (or I remember Walt Mossberg mentioning something about that) on air.<p>The real reason this was shitty, is because there is a teenager, fellow journalist, ect. who is now dealing with these trolls because the root cause didn't go away.
"Bernie Bros"? seriously?
stick with the solid story of racist twitter users threatening you with violence and you might get some sympathy...<p>I was hoping to read something more considered than "I can't take the harsh verbal repartee"
perhaps along the lines of "hey Twitter is using my content to make money, I'd rather write a column for the NY Times and get paid for it- same negative comments but no character limit and plus I get paid!"
The kind of things he talks about here are the same kind of things that made me leave reddit, never to return.
I haven't found issue with twitter really, but I guess when you get to that kind of renown things must get harder to avoid.
With articles like this one can see why all the social media companies and even Google put people in a "bubble". Twitter for the most part doesn't, and this sort of thing happens. Expect more bubbles, and to be isolated further from reality on the internet as time goes on.
People need to grow thicker skin. By quitting you basically demonstrated that hate speech works. You need to do the opposite, just ignore the haters and keep your followers happy.