Paypal blocks Free Speech Union accounts - PayPal backs Down

I tried finding some newspaper articles about this, but I stumbled into one arguing that PayPal banning people from spending their money on the things they want to was an example of the 'free market' so I stopped.

So yeah Lotus Eaters links, sue me.

PayPal Cancels the Free Speech Union
PayPal Backs Down

Statement by the Free Speech Union:

Press Release – PayPal Deplatforms Free Speech Union​

PayPal has demonetised the Free Speech Union. It is not uncommon for financial companies like PayPal to withdraw services from individuals or groups who express politically contentious views, but this is the first time an organisation that defends people’s right to express such views has been demonetised. This is a new low and takes us one step closer towards a Chinese-style social credit system in which those who do not toe the party line are shut out of the financial system.

The Free Speech Union was notified that PayPal was closing its account last Thursday, effective immediately. The reason given was that we had breached the company’s ‘Acceptable Use Policy’, but no detail was provided. We contacted a customer service agent, but she could throw no light on the matter. We wrote to the CEO of PayPal UK and the Corporate Affairs Department of PayPal UK and PayPal US, but got no reply. We had effectively been accused, charged, tried, convicted and sentenced in one fell swoop, with no possibility of parole.

Within minutes of receiving this notification, Toby Young, the General Secretary of the Free Speech Union, was also told his personal PayPal account was being shut down, as was the account of the Daily Sceptic, the news publishing website he runs. In every case, the reason given was the same: violating PayPal’s ‘Acceptable Use Policy’. It seems implausible that all three accounts could be guilty of exactly the same offence within minutes of each other. None of the accounts, including Toby’s personal account, which he’s had since 2013, have been told they have breached any of PayPal’s policies before.

We still do not know why, exactly, PayPal closed the FSU’s account, but we suspect it is because someone at PayPal – possibly the entire C-suite – disapproves of some of the people we have defended. PayPal has form when it comes to demonetising points of view it disagrees with, having recently shut down the accounts of the advocacy group UsForThem, as well as the personal account of the gender critical evolutionary biologist Colin Wright, and the account of Gays Against Groomers, an LGB group that opposes the teaching of gender ideology in schools.

About a third of the FSU’s 9,500 members use PayPal to process their membership dues, so this is seriously disruptive. If you are one of those members, you will have already received an email from us with instructions of how to switch to another payment processor. If you haven’t received an email, that means you are not affected and there is no need to do anything. If you think you may have been affected but have not received an email from us, contact us at admin@freespeechunion.org.

We are in the process of considering how to fight back, but at the very least we will be urging the Government to put legal safeguards in place to prevent others being deplatformed in this way. It should be against the law for any financial services company operating in the UK to discriminate against its customers – or potential customers – on the grounds of their political beliefs. If we allow privately-owned corporations to deplatform individuals and organisations whose political views they disagree with, then free speech is effectively over in this country.

You can read more about what has happened in articles by Toby in the Daily Sceptic, the Spectator and the Telegraph.

The Spectator Article:

t 5.30 p.m. this evening, PayPal notified me that it has restored all three of the accounts it cancelled a couple of weeks ago – the accounts for the Daily Sceptic, the Free Speech Union and my personal account. In all three cases, the email read as follows:

“We have continued to review the information provided in connection with your account and we take seriously the input from our customers and stakeholders. Based on these ongoing reviews, we have made the decision to reinstate your account. You should now be able to use your account in the normal way. We sincerely appreciate your business and offer our apologies for any inconvenience this disruption in service may have caused.

Forgive me if I don’t jump for joy
Forgive me if I don’t jump for joy. Since PayPal dropped the bombshell on 15 September, I’ve been desperately trying to save the Daily Sceptic and the Free Speech Union from going under – ‘inconvenience’ doesn’t begin to describe what I’ve been through. About a quarter of the regular donations people were making to the Daily Sceptic were being made via PayPal and about a third of the Free Speech Union’s members were paying their recurring membership dues using PayPal. We’ve had to write to all those people affected and plead with them to use a different payment processor, as well as redraw our annual budgets in anticipation of the revenue loss. So, telling me now that it was all a terrible mistake is too little, too late.


And it clearly wasn’t a mistake. PayPal told me it had permanently closed all three accounts and appeals in all three cases had been unsuccessful. It couldn’t quite decide why it had closed the accounts – it alternated between telling me I’d breached its policy about not promoting ‘hate, violence or racial intolerance’ and telling newspapers my accounts had been closed because I was spreading ‘Covid-19 misinformation’ – but it had definitely decided to close them. Now, apparently, I’m not guilty of any of these sins and my accounts were just under ‘review’. After ‘input’ from its ‘customers and stakeholders’ it has decided I’m kosher after all.


So what’s happened? I’ve received thousands of emails and messages from people telling me they’ve closed their PayPal accounts in solidarity, so that may be the ‘input’ the company is referring to. Another reason may be because the company’s efforts to cancel me have been universally condemned across the British media. Last week, Danny Kruger MP asked a question about it in parliament and on Sunday a letter was sent to Jacob Rees-Mogg by 42 peers and MPs urging the Business Secretary to hold PayPal to account. It now looks as though a Bill currently going through parliament will be amended to make it illegal for financial services to engage in this kind of political censorship in future.


It goes without saying that I won’t be using PayPal’s services again. I made the mistake of trusting PayPal when I set up the Free Speech Union and the Daily Sceptic, embedding its software into our payment processing systems. Given what I know now – that it can demonetise you on a whim, seemingly without any proper justification – I’m not going to make that mistake twice. Maybe if PayPal restores the accounts of all the other people and organisations it has deplatformed for political reasons, and promises not to do anything like that again, I might reconsider. In the meantime, I will still be devoting all my energies to lobbying the government to pass a law reining in companies like PayPal so other people with non-woke political views don’t have to endure what I’ve been put through.

Related news: Paypal wants to fine people thousands of dollars for speech

 

[MadDisaster]

I'd been following this story a bit, and I'm assuming PayPal didn't expect backlash that would reach government levels. If it could potentially result in regulation, they are going to desperately try to back-peddle. One of the genuinely useful things the government does is regulate large business practices, and Europe seems to be much more eager to use that power.

 

[WhatIsThePunchline]

I'd been following this story a bit, and I'm assuming PayPal didn't expect backlash that would reach government levels. If it could potentially result in regulation, they are going to desperately try to back-peddle. One of the genuinely useful things the government does is regulate large business practices, and Europe seems to be much more eager to use that power.

I'm not surprised they didn't expect that. Just from a cursory examination they've done this many many times already.

 

[derpherp2]

I'm not surprised they didn't expect that. Just from a cursory examination they've done this many many times already.

I mean we're literally on one of the websites they not only blacklisted but press ganged multiple DDoS-mitigation sites into also following suits.
The fact people trust them and are not just abusing how slow their billing time is on weekends to fuck them over is goddamn hillarious.

 

[Load Bearing Drywall]

I'm not surprised they didn't expect that. Just from a cursory examination they've done this many many times already.

I don't think American companies really get that the UK isn't just America with a funny accent, for whatever reason over the last 5 years some enough of them have grown spines and decided to fight for something. Whether it's Brexit or women's rights, they're saying a big fuck you to globohomo, and for some reason there's a group of journos and judges over there who actually give more of a shit about free speech than their American counterparts.

 

[Sexy Peach Emoji]

Whether it's Brexit or women's rights, they're saying a big fuck you to globohomo, and for some reason there's a group of journos and judges over there who actually give more of a shit about free speech than their American counterparts.

The UK is still in bed with homoglobal. They continue to support immigrant rape gangs, troons, and the oppression of their native populace.

 

[Angry Alt Right Nerd]

I don't think American companies really get that the UK isn't just America with a funny accent, for whatever reason over the last 5 years some enough of them have grown spines and decided to fight for something. Whether it's Brexit or women's rights, they're saying a big fuck you to globohomo, and for some reason there's a group of journos and judges over there who actually give more of a shit about free speech than their American counterparts.

The American counterparts care, but only if the government does it. Europe never went down the lolbertarian path, so while their government might throw you in prison for calling Chris-chan a man, at least they'll do it themselves instead of using their coy 'plausible deniability' shtick with private companies.

 

[pikachudidnothingwrong]

PP is a scam org that literally locks accounts and steals any money, regularly!

More generally.. We seriously need a neutrality act of some kind for financial services. They should be treated like utilities.. full stop! ESPECIALLY in an age where elites are trying to take money digital!

 

[ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ]

Now Big Tech is coming for your money​

Archive

Did you know that payment-processing platforms are now taking confession? Yes, you read that right. US crowdfunding platform Patreon, valued at $4 billion, now has a clause in its Community Guidelines on ‘renouncements’. The guidelines empower Patreon to cancel users’ accounts – and thus their income – for a multitude of heresies. But if users ‘renounce’ their heretical beliefs to the high priests of Patreon’s ‘Trust and Safety’ team, they may have their accounts and livelihoods restored. Patreon even generously promises to ‘educate’ creators who hold what it deems to be problematic views.

Of course, we know exactly what kind of views that means. Back in 2018, Patreon notoriously cancelled several conservative commentators who had been critical of identity politics.

Patreon’s renunciation policy is only one example of a frightening trend. Payment processors and crowdfunding platforms – as well as some high-street banks – are weaponising their power as providers of financial services to police the political views of their users.

In a review of these practices for the Free Speech Union (FSU), I found that a majority of payment processors and crowdfunding platforms use vague, subjective language in their policies. Not only do they have the usual prohibitions on ‘hate speech’ – their guidelines also ban ‘code words and slogans’ that could be ‘proxies’ for beliefs they do not approve of. This approach gives these firms expansive scope to deny services to users, potentially based on the mere perception of heretical political views.

That seems to be what happened in September, when PayPal tried to cancel the FSU and a host of other groups. PayPal claimed that the FSU, the Daily Sceptic, UsForThem, the UK Medical Freedom Alliance, and even the personal accounts of individuals associated with the above, had all broken PayPal’s rules against ‘activities that promote hate, violence or racial intolerance’. No evidence of this ‘hate’ was provided. But it is obvious what the reason was – the groups targeted by PayPal are all sceptical of modern orthodoxies on identity politics and Covid-19. Such views are frequently decried as ‘hateful’ by people seeking to smear and censor their political opponents. For its part, the FSU protects all manner of political speech. It seems to have been targeted simply because it defends the right of people of any political persuasion to express contentious opinions. In the new theocracy of financial-service provision, plurality and viewpoint diversity are not welcome.

This is no small matter. Many depend for their income on market-dominant platforms like Patreon and Ko-fi, or processors like PayPal and Shopify. So if financial services can be withdrawn from certain people at any moment, this threatens their livelihoods. For instance, when PayPal suddenly cancelled the FSU’s account, a full third of its income was put at risk. Fortunately, by mobilising its supporters, the FSU was able to force PayPal to u-turn.

But not everyone is so lucky. Most users persecuted for saying something deemed politically incorrect will not be able to respond as the FSU did, meaning their PayPal accounts will remain permanently closed. This highlights the arbitrary, authoritarian power these companies currently wield.

Indeed, many payment processors provide no information about why a given account has been cancelled. Nor will they hear appeals, meaning users have no opportunity to defend themselves or to contest claims that their views are ‘hateful’ or ‘intolerant’. Meanwhile, crowdfunding platforms remain largely unregulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority and the Financial Ombudsman Service. This means there is often no right of appeal when you have been deplatformed.

No one elected PayPal. No one agreed that unaccountable executives at Patreon could use the threat of financial ruin to enforce political conformity. Yet these organisations now have the power to sever a user’s income stream without even explaining why.

What is more, some payment processors and crowdfunding platforms even apply their policies to user conduct that has no connection to their platform. GoFundMe, for example, reviews users’ social-media activity when considering whether to allow them to set up a fundraiser. And according to its ‘community guidelines’, Patreon promises to ‘look at what you do with your membership off our platform’. These clauses allow Patreon and GoFundMe to shut down people’s businesses or fundraising access because of views they have expressed elsewhere on social media.

Their arbitrary power needs to be reined in. This week, Conservative MP Sally-Ann Hart proposed an amendment to the Financial Services and Markets Bill that would make it illegal for payment-processing companies to withhold or withdraw services from customers for purely political reasons. This at least is a sign that politicians are beginning to wake up to the problem.

We need to remind the high priests at PayPal and Patreon that their lofty ambitions have limits. The British public does not need lessons in political purity from the likes of PayPal. We must not let unelected corporations set the terms of political debate.

Carrie Clark is the research officer of the Free Speech Union. Find out more about the FSU’s campaign against the tech giants here.

 

[Haramburger]

The UK is still in bed with homoglobal. They continue to support immigrant rape gangs, troons, and the oppression of their native populace.

agree, but I can appreciate that in picking their battles, they're setting precedents in areas the US isn't right now. We'll hopefully share strats and full clear globohomo down the line

 

[TowinKarz]

Anyone still doing business with them is getting exactly what they deserve at this point.

What is it? Three times now? They've inserted that $2,500 hatespeech fine for saying/doing anything they don't like in the real world into the TOS? And got caught? Claimed it was a mistake, they never meant to put it in, it was just a committee spitball idea? And then after only a weekend, put it back in again?

Yeah.... this is the kind of company that ends up inspiring new banking law by their very nature, and not in the GOOD way.

 

[pikachudidnothingwrong]

We need a banking or financial service neutrality act and we need one soon. (that's banks, CC and PP) Especially as digital money becomes more and more common. This kind of bullshit in an all digital system would mean utter ruination. Secondly we need such services (particularly banks, who are backed, supported and cashed by tax and government) to be treated like water and power! They are every bit as essential today. Thirdly and a little less important as long as we get the previous two, we need some kind of official payment transfer system option.

More generally speaking. We need to get politicians and government to back the fuck off and stop forcing banks and CCs to play money police in place of the actual police. No more "you should have known because.." Seriously.. This shit is like punishing phone companies for not cutting off, by themselves with no legal involvement, criminals who scam people over the phone... before the fact!