News of Amazon allegedly locking out a smart home user over hate speech allegations is raising questions about technocratic overreach.

Microsoft engineer, Brandon Jackson, said he was denied access to his smart home devices after Amazon accused him of making racist comments to a delivery driver.

The 7-day lockout took place in late May.

At first, the engineer thought he’d been hacked.

With a process of elimination ruling out the latter, ‘puzzled’ Jackson rang Amazon’s customer service hotline.

In what he described as ‘taking a surreal turn’ he ended up talking with an executive.

Rather than answer questions, according to Jackson the Amazon representative interrogated him, asking if he knew why the company had cut off access.

The Microsoft engineer told them he was unsure of the reasons, stating in a recount on Medium, that this was when the executive’s tone became ‘somewhat accusatory’.

Amazon rudely informed Jackson that he’d been locked out of his accounts for making racist remarks towards a delivery driver.

He pleaded not guilty.

Trying to clear things up, the engineer provided material which proved he wasn’t home at the time.

This included audio and video showing nothing more was said than an ‘automated doorbell response of, “Excuse me, can I help you?”’

In his defence, Jackson explained, ‘It’s possible the driver, who was wearing headphones, misinterpreted the message.’

Jackson even added that most of the delivery drivers in the area shared his ethnicity.

The facts fell on deaf ears.

Jackson’s ‘entire smart home system [was to remain] disabled’ until ‘Amazon ran an internal investigation’ which involved questioning the driver.

Writing about the fallout, Jackson said the treatment has made him review a ‘decade of loyalty’ to the brand.

‘It was drastic,’ he wrote, adding, ‘there has to be a more reasonable way of handling such issues, rather than a blanket shutdown of all services.’

Amazon eventually reinstated the services, without comment.

Post-script, Jackson’s alleged experience conjures up potential scenarios of activist overreach.

Giving technocrats the ability to shut down basic services if they are, for example, triggered by a MAGA hat in the front window, or jarred by a well-kept American flag sitting on an equally well-kept front lawn, is scary.

If you think this is a stretch, re-acquaint yourself with Elon Musk’s Twitter Files, or the Durham Report exposing a well-funded campaign to allegedly delegitimise a then-sitting United States President.

Deepfake technology, powered by advances in AI, puts the manufacturing of fake hate crimes within an activist’s reach.

Couple this with the Woke culture war’s erosion of ‘innocent before being proven guilty’ and the threat to an impartial justice system has never been more real.

Being wary of technology, and pointing out evidence of its abuse, is not just a Luddite’s game.

In the case of Amazon shutting out users for perceived social crimes, is Amazon punishing users before they’ve even had the chance to prove their innocence…?

Worse still, it is my opinion that Amazon overreached.

Any tech company suspending habeas corpus is a tech company guilty of suspending the West’s common law tradition.

We are opening the door for tech companies to take on the role of judge, jury, and executioner.

By rejecting evidence for hearsay, Amazon rejected the fundamental right to due process – as was painfully established through the Magna Carta.

To lean on Edmund Burke’s epic protest to the Sheriffs of Bristol in 1777, who died and made Amazon king?

---

This article was first published at CaldronPool.

Get 10 issues for just $10

Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for the next 10 magazine issues, plus full online access, for just $10.

SUBSCRIBE 10 issues for $10 REGISTER 3 articles a month

Already a subscriber? Log in