Why does western social media allow hate to prevail over objectivity?

Editor's note: David Lee is a Beijing-based consultant and author who focuses on energy, health, international politics and international development. The article reflects the author's opinions, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

Not long ago, video footages of previous terrorist attacks in Xinjiang posted online as part of CGTN's documentary series suddenly disappeared from western social media. It's been reported that the posted videos contain unlicensed audio contents.

The intellectual property argument seems vague and is itself debatable, but the video footages to prove the cruel brutality of separatists, terrorists, and hate criminals in Xinjiang are gone. Moreover, the western social media has apparently removed any trace related to the CGTN postings, including all comments.

While objective reporting is removed as a result of a dubious excuse about IP violation, the western social media seems to be quite content with the postings of hate messages. An audacious, shameless tweet by German footballer Mesut Ozil quickly gained notoriety over the weekend.

The tweet by Ozil, who plays for English Premier League's Arsenal club, comes in the form of a provocative poem written in the Turk language, which makes outlandish accusations about China burning the Quran and slaughtering Muslim scholars. Moreover, Ozil alleges in "poetic" manner that, while Muslim men are detained in concentration camps, Muslim women are forced to marry Chinese men.

Curiously, the "poem" from a modern-day footballing celebrity reads like something aged at least 1,000 years. More blatant than its asynchronous nature, the tweet contains malicious disinformation to provide a cheap excuse for extremism. Ozil is openly hailing the so-called East Turkistan as wronged and oppressed faithful who fight for Islam, while the extremist movement has long been recognized as a terrorist group by the United Nations.

As of the writing of this present essay, Ozil's inflammatory tweet remains online and there is no action from Twitter to remove it whatsoever, despite quick backlash from China. The stark contrast between the quick removal of objective video footages recording criminal cruelty and inaction over obvious hate messaging is appalling as much as it is sickening.

Why does western social media allow hate to prevail over objectivity? This fundamental question can be explored by taking into account the shifting dynamics of discourse power in today's world.

Increasingly, rising China is seen by the West as a credible force that promotes a different discourse and model of modern governance. When it comes to effective communications and convincing narratives, the previous norm of a lopsided playing ground is giving way to a more competitive one, where the discerning international audience has options to choose from.

Understandably, China-generated contents are automatically placed at a disadvantage when fundamental ideological issues are at stake. The different treatment by the western social media of the Xinjiang postings represents the latest round of sword-crossing in the fight for narrative and discourse.

I'm glad to see that the Arsenal club, which employs Ozil, is quick to distance itself away from the insensible controversy. By saying that Ozil's tweet does not represent Arsenal, which has high commercial stakes in China, the club management remains clear-headed that sports must not be sabotaged by extremism.

For the moment, I appreciate Arsenal management for doing what's right for sports. Meanwhile, I wonder whether Twitter and western social media at large can do what's right for fair information sharing.

Extremism doesn't have a place in social media. Twitter and all responsible platforms must take action to eradicate extremist messaging. In fighting against the spread of extremism, the international community must transcend ideological discord rooted in contending models of governance.