Social media platform X has suspended alleged journalist Ken Klippenstein for exposing personal information about former President Donald Trump’s running mate, Senator JD Vance (R-OH) provided by Iran’s government.
Leftist users on the platform responded by crying foul, claiming that X banning Klippenstein is similar to how the company, under previous ownership, suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story in the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election.
This is one of those instances that makes me wonder whether these people are stupid, or if they just think the rest of us are stupid. Either way, they are brazenly lying.
At the center of this controversy is Klippenstein’s decision to release the Trump campaign’s vetting documents on Vance, which included the senator’s personal information, including emails, phone numbers, and addresses. The documents were obtained by hackers on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which means there’s a possibility that Klippenstein may be (purposely or accidentally) doing Tehran’s bidding for political purposes.
In response, X suspended Klippenstein’s account, which has angered folks on the left. They argue that this decision is hypocritical. They also claim folks on the right who support the move are also being hypocritical because of their opposition to the platform’s decision to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story.
What these folks are missing – or deliberately leaving out – is that X adopted a policy in March that disallows “doxxing,” which occurs when someone exposes personal information without the person’s consent:
You may not threaten to expose, incentivize others to expose, or publish or post other people’s private information without their express authorization and permission, or share private media of individuals without their consent.
Sharing someone’s private information online without their permission, sometimes called “doxxing,” is a breach of their privacy and can pose serious safety and security risks for those affected.
Additionally, posting images is an important part of our users’ experience on X. However, where individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in an individual piece of media, we believe they should be able to determine whether or not it is shared. When we are notified by individuals depicted, or their authorized representative, that they did not consent to having media shared, we will remove the media. This policy is not applicable to public figures.
Lastly, having sexual, nude, or intimate media shared without express consent not only severely violates someone’s privacy and psychological safety, but can lead to physical, emotional, and financial hardship and we work tirelessly to remove this content immediately.
Under the previous management, the laptop story was suppressed for a different reason: The company claimed it was information that was hacked by Russians. This contention was later exposed as one in a long list of left-wing hoaxes.
What is also interesting about this story is that the doxxing of Vance was done using information coming from Iranian hackers, which clearly violates the platform’s rules.
Those on the left complaining about Klippenstein’s suspension are the true hypocrites. They are only upset because one of their own faced consequences for violating X’s terms of service. If he had done this under the company’s previous management, there is no way he would have been suspended because he has the “correct” political beliefs; those in charge would likely be hoping that the information would somehow hurt Trump’s chances of winning reelection.
X made the right call in this case. People should not be rewarded for exposing personal information – especially of public figures who could face violence as a result of their address being exposed. Klippenstein knew exactly what he was doing when he refused to redact that information in his report. Perhaps the actual reason why these people are upset is because they are hoping something nefarious happens to their political opposition.
