The following tweet from Lila’s account, @LilaGraceRose, is one of many that was flagged for violating Twitter’s hate and sensitive topic policy. The tweet is almost word for word a Dr. Seuss quote, with pro-life hashtags added on.
The social media platform refused to allow Live Action to buy advertisements on the grounds that Live Action tweets violate Twitter’s hate and sensitive content policy. According to Twitter representatives, Live Action must first delete all tweets calling for the end of taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, all tweets of undercover investigations into Planned Parenthood, and any ultrasound images of preborn children. Live Action must also delete, or at least replace, the Live Action website, in order to be considered for advertising on Twitter.
Specific tweets that Twitter considers “offensive” can be seen here. Upon even a quick review of these tweets – coupled with the knowledge that Planned Parenthood’s tweets about the exact same issues are apparently considered perfectly acceptable to Twitter – it becomes obvious that Live Action’s (or Lila Rose’s) tweets are in no way a violation of Twitter’s policy and are not “offensive” in any sense of the word – that is, unless we’re talking about people getting offended by and seeking to block opposing viewpoints, which is clearly the case here.
Following the release of the information on Twitter’s suppression of pro-life messages, Twitter users reacted quickly and strongly to the obviously biased and ideologically motivated actions:
This tweet is no longer available. It may have been deleted or made private. Try on X.
An overwhelming number of similar tweets can easily be found via the search tool on Twitter. It is obvious that fans of fair speech are outraged over Twitter’s blatant suppression of pro-life messages. A social media platform should not be secretly deciding for the public which side of the abortion debate we will be exposed to. We, the users of Twitter, have the right to information, and we object to Twitter’s inappropriate control over material – as well as their laughably pathetic attempts to explain how pro-life content is “offensive” and in violation of their policy.
By this logic, perhaps Twitter should ban itself from advertising, as some of its tweets could be considered “offensive” by its own arbitrary application of standards:
Editor’s Note: All op-eds are the opinion of the writer and not necessarily the official position of Live Action.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Opinion
