When Internets go wrong part 2

I’ve reactivated my Twitter account, but I won’t be indulging in my usual Bruce Forsyth obsession and lies about 1970s newsreaders. At least not until I’ve found out why it took Twitter over 14 hours to suspend an account that had been posting images of the sexual abuse of children.

I thought I’d email Twitter’s CEO Dick Costolo to ask why the removal of the offending item took so bloody long. Mr Costolo’s email address is not in the public domain. If I had Mr Costolo’s address, I wonder how long I’d last on Twitter if I posted it on there? Under 14 hours? Under 14 minutes? Anyway, I tried a few different variations in the hope that one of them would be right.

When I woke up, I realised I could tweet Mr Costolo, so I reactivated my account and asked him this: “Hello @dickc. You run this place, I gather. Why did it take so long after reporting to remove a child abuser’s account and pictures?”

Let’s see how he responds, if at all. I encourage you all to ask him the same question.

Oh look, what’s this? Anonymous are claiming to have got the offending account taken down within an hour? @YourAnonNews alerted its followers to the account at 3.04pm on Thursday, UK time. I had reported the account to cp@twitter.com at 2.54am on Thursday, over 12 hours earlier, and I know I wasn’t the first. The Internet Watch Foundation was doing serious work behind the scenes to get the account pulled long before the Anonymous intervention. Saying it all happened within an hour is unhelpful because it makes Twitter seem responsive and effective. If Anonymous had said that after 12 or more hours of inaction, the account was removed within an hour of their tweet, and that these two details were unlikely to be coincidental, that would have made for a much better line.

This entry was posted in value of nothing. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to When Internets go wrong part 2

  1. Old Holborn says:

    Your next target should be the companies who make the cameras that take these vile images and the phone companies who allow the distribution of them via their 3G networks and the electricity companies who power them. Pretty soon, we’ll all be living in mud huts because some dork posted some nasty photos and you can celebrate “progress” and “freedom of speech”

  2. Cheeseford says:

    Stuff your mask right up your arse, you tedious fuckwit.

  3. Fox says:

    OH, that’s a rubbish ‘slippery slope’ argument. Louis’s not saying Twitter (or any of the other organisations unwittingly involved in the distribution of these images) should be shut down. He’s just asking for a reasonably quick response to reported abuse of Twitter’s *own* terms of use. ‘click on account’ ‘look at images’ ‘click on SUSPEND ACCOUNT button’ surely can’t take long.

  4. Simon says:

    Old Holborn. Freedom of speech doesn’t give you the right to break the law. It does however guarantee your right to be a cunt holding an opinion that literally not one reasonably intelligent person would agree with. Also, it means we can point and laugh at you hiding behind your pathetic “oo, look at my mask, I’m a rebel” persona.

    So just go fuck yourself, it’s difficult but not against the law.

  5. Jamie S says:

    Old Holborn you dozy prick. Your trolling isn’t even well executed – I can think of at least three spurious but more credible analogies with which to try and attack Louis’ position on this. Try harder son.

  6. Catface says:


  7. Jehan Cottard says:

    Old Holborn – homophobic tosser (see And we’re all out of time…see you in four years. Cheers Michael, you MASSIVE GAY SHITE – a typical Tweet).

    Louis, I love you, but limit your Tweets to 1 or 2 a day, or take a one month, rather than half-day, Twitter sabbatical – you need it, the sweary ‘Seb Coe is a Cunt’ posts are beneath you and you’re surely going to regret banalities like ‘That’s all the sport. Now have Sean Bean in a dress’. I find it worth remembering that no more than 30 people are actively reading all your posts and therefore the need to share every thought that comes into you head is even more of a waste of time than you secretly know it is.

  8. Cheeseford says:

    There’s nothing secret about it being a waste of time, Jehan. I know that perfectly well. So, on that level, I should probably have a break. All of my tweets, even the few really good ones, are brainfarts. Are the Seb Coe things beneath me? I’m afraid they’re a pretty accurate reflection of what I think. So, I’m beneath myself. Why would I regret the Sean Bean thing? I am banal. The Olympics finished and suddenly there was a trailer for an upcoming drama featuring Sean Bean in a dress.

  9. Sherrinford Holmes says:

    Great work with the Twitter saga Louis.

    Intrigued to know why you are so anti-Seb though. Sure, he’s a Tory, but not a particularly vicious one. I’ve always thought that he (along with Ryan Giggs and now Jessica Ennis) have done this country an invaluable service by showing how well mixed race Brits can do. He’s always been proud of his Indian family and that alone puts him clear of c*&t status for me.

  10. Cheeseford says:

    My true feelings for Seb Coe are disdain rather than hate. The use of the word ‘hate’ is purely down to The Day Today. I know people who know him, though, and the reports have not been favourable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *