WASHINGTON, D.C. Jan. 26 (DPI) – Twitter announced  that it will begin censoring in countries where it is required, sending a handful of readers to comment boards to either condemn, resign themselves to or ruminate on the fallout of “edited” Twitter feeds.

“As we continue to grow internationally, we will enter countries that have different ideas about the contours of freedom of expression,” according to a blog post on Twitter.com.

According to NYTimes.com, Twitter has more users overseas than in the US.

Readers (mostly on wsj.com, less so on nytimes.com) focused on two strings: That acceding to the demands of authoritarian regimes — most notably China, where Twitter has no presence — was a pragmatic if repugnant move, even to stalwart defenders of the First Amendment.

As one wsj.com comment put it, “the alternative is (for Twitter to be) simply blocked by the country. Wouldn’t limited flow of ideas/info be preferable to none? What’s limited today, may not be so limited 5 years from now.”

Indeed, that’s appears to be the reasoning behind Twitter’s decision to censor posts: “One of our core values as a company is to defend and respect each user’s voice,” according to its blog post. “We try to keep content up wherever and whenever we can, and we will be transparent with users when we can’t. The Tweets must continue to flow.”

That position was hardly convincing all readers, many of whom felt Twitter was abandoning basic principles to kowtow to regimes that will never open up or reform. “It is so unbelievable that Twitter believes censorship is the passport to enter China market,” wrote one wsj.com poster. “Don’t they know? What the Chinese gov … completely controlled by the Communist Party … wants the complete power of controlling every channel of information transmission. As a foreign internet server, Twitter will never gain the confidence from Communist Party. Twitter will fail to enter China market. Believe or not.”

Another focused on the impact on political and ethnic minorities in China: “Twitter (is) turning its back on the oppressed peoples of China – the Uighers, Tibetans, Dai peoples and the corruption, political prisoners, and lao gai enslavement camps that the Chinese communist party uses to intern those that they don’t like. Boycott Twitter!”

China already has a widely used platform like Twitter called Sina Weibo.

A second string of discussion was whether Twitter was pressured to submit to censorship by its newest large investor, Saudi Arabia’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, who last month made a $300 million investment in Twitter Inc.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204791104577107733831343976.html

One wsj.com commenter actually welcomed the country-by-country censorship, since it might curtail unwanted Tweets. “What’s the big deal? You won’t get inane shares of cute kitty posts or SPAMmed by some stupid “marketer.”  I censor 100% of tweet twaddle from Twitter tweakers. It’s mindless prattle of the non-thinkers in humanity.”

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/twitter-announces-micro-censorship-policy/?hp